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

[newsjunkie]

How can AH cancel Clint Heichel's cell phone account ?

The AT&T account would be registered under Clint's name, address,etc ?

See pages 7-8 of the affadavit. . .JH put his own sim card in the Iphone. It was not registered to CH anymore.

 

[Xavier]

From my original post:



From PIM's post:




Actually, my point is that IF someone else was involved, was the "actual" perp, etc. I don't think JH would take the fall. I think he would have given up the info in a quick minute. Once he started "confessing" it seems he gave up lots of info it might have taken LE quite some time to discover if JH would have kept his mouth shut.

It's pretty hard for me to imagine that he would give some kind of fake confession to protect someone else. What would be the point? If someone were threatening him or blackmailing him, I certainly think telling LE would alleviate that threat.

And, although I certainly believe JH may have previously committed some other crimes for which he has not been caught, he seems so disorganized, frantic, etc. I just can’t see any reason that he would “have very good reason to keep his mouth shut” about anyone else.

JMO

PIM--- I think your theory of a blackmailer or other perp is very possible given how things were conventiently found, placed, and how Holt seemed to volunteer anything to LE, it seemed his frantic, worried behavior was someone wanting to get trust and protection from LE. Sort of like a child running, confessing to his parents to protect him from a bully.

 

[gwenabob]

This is Oregon's Evidence Code for Spousal privilege:

§ 40.255¹

Rule 505. Husband-wife privilege
(1) As used in this section, unless the context requires otherwise:
(a) Confidential communication means a communication by a spouse to the other spouse and not intended to be disclosed to any other person.
(b) Marriage means a marital relationship between husband and wife, legally recognized under the laws of this state.
(2) In any civil or criminal action, a spouse has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent the other spouse from disclosing any confidential communication made by one spouse to the other during the marriage. The privilege created by this subsection may be claimed by either spouse. The authority of the spouse to claim the privilege and the claiming of the privilege is presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary.
(3) In any criminal proceeding, neither spouse, during the marriage, shall be examined adversely against the other as to any other matter occurring during the marriage unless the spouse called as a witness consents to testify.
(4) There is no privilege under this section:
(a) In all criminal actions in which one spouse is charged with bigamy or with an offense or attempted offense against the person or property of the other spouse or of a child of either, or with an offense against the person or property of a third person committed in the course of committing or attempting to commit an offense against the other spouse;
(b) As to matters occurring prior to the marriage; or
(c) In any civil action where the spouses are adverse parties. [1981 c.892 §34; 1983 c.433 §1

Bolded by me. In essence, the privilege applies during the marriage. The code does not specifically address what happens after divorce, but if it were me, I would argue that JH has no privilege because he committed an offense against AH when he committed adultery by raping another woman.

JMO,

Salem

I thought I would just reiterate that marital privilege applies only to confidential communications that occurred between the spouses, and not spoken to anyone else. That means a spouse may testify concerning behavior and actions. Just not things that were said or written.

 

[JoCoKSEyes]

No offense, but if there is a blackmailer or anyone else involved in the commission of this crime other than Jonathan Holt, I will cook and eat my favorite winter sweater.

 

[Quester]

Wife of [WH] murder suspect cites 'irreconcilable differences' in divorce filings

http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/index.ssf/2012/11/wife_of_whitney_heichel_murder.html

 

[newsjunkie]

I thought I would just reiterate that marital privilege applies only to confidential communications that occurred between the spouses, and not spoken to anyone else. That means a spouse may testify concerning behavior and actions. Just not things that were said or written.

Maybe a stupid question, but isn't it spousal "privilege" that she could take if she WANTS to, but not necessarily have to. Not speaking to just this case, but if a wife chose to stay married to the suspect, but didn't want to use that privilege. Could she testify regarding anything, if she chose to? I know probably not a usual scenario, but just curious if she is prohibited from that testimony or if it is a choice.

ETA: I apologize for making you read run-on and incomplete sentences! Too tired to fix it. . .

 

[Bravo]

No offense, but if there is a blackmailer or anyone else involved in the commission of this crime other than Jonathan Holt, I will cook and eat my favorite winter sweater.

Me too. Another case here at WS. Murder of Rebekah Gay. Many similarities. Guy is caught and confesses. Not common to get confessions and location of the body. It does happen. Wish it did in all cases. Having said that I dont understand specuation of another involved. Just bouncing off your post.

 

[rmarie3]

http://portlandtribune.com/go/42-news/122564-a-life-well-loved

I believe this was posted earlier tonight - but a wonderful article about Whitney and Clint and family. As tragic as this case is - this article warmed my heart to read that she had such a wonderful last night of her life on October 15th with family and Clint full of love and laughter. I am glad they had that last night.

Also something else from the article jumped out at me:

"Later that night, they were at the couple’s house. Whitney left to go home before her midnight curfew, but her car wouldn’t start. She was out of gas."

She sounds like me and runs her car down to empty (most likely cause she also worked so close to home) And as it has been speculated before in this thread - most likely the cause of the gas charges on her card by the perp.

THis article made my heart ache for Clint....

 

[nikb]

http://portlandtribune.com/go/42-news/122564-a-life-well-loved

I believe this was posted earlier tonight - but a wonderful article about Whitney and Clint and family. As tragic as this case is - this article warmed my heart to read that she had such a wonderful last night of her life on October 15th with family and Clint full of love and laughter. I am glad they had that last night.

Also something else from the article jumped out at me:

"Later that night, they were at the couple’s house. Whitney left to go home before her midnight curfew, but her car wouldn’t start. She was out of gas."

She sounds like me and runs her car down to empty (most likely cause she also worked so close to home) And as it has been speculated before in this thread - most likely the cause of the gas charges on her card by the perp.

THis article made my heart ache for Clint....

Thank you for posting this. I don't remember seeing this article before. In particular I don't remember reading that Clint was with her that night, and although I'm still sad I'm very glad to read that.

My heart just aches reading this:

"For Clint, it’s hardest at night. “Just before you go to bed and there’s that quiet,” he says. “Normally it’s the time where I would talk about the day or she would talk about the day — that’s the hardest for me because she’s not there. Going to bed by myself, she’s not there. Waking up in the middle of the night and looking over to her side of the bed — she’s not there. Waking up in the morning on her side of the bed because she’s not there.”

But in those moments, where silence was always filled with her tender voice, Clint plays the message.

“Hey you,” she softly says. “I’m just calling to make sure you’re up and to say hi. I love you and hope you have a good day and I’ll talk to you later. Bye.” "

 

[nikb]

I am so, so thankful that CH saved that message. I bet he is too.

 

[kodi]

PS: welcome Kodi!

Thanks, nikb. *smiles*

 

[Sasquatch]

Wife of [WH] murder suspect cites 'irreconcilable differences' in divorce filings

http://www.oregonlive.com/gresham/index.ssf/2012/11/wife_of_whitney_heichel_murder.html

"Oregon is a no-fault state, which means the only basis for a divorce is "irreconcilable differences between the parties have caused the irremediable breakdown of the marriage."
http://www.divorcenet.com/states/oregon/or_faq01

 

[Sasquatch]

"She sounds like me and runs her car down to empty (most likely cause she also worked so close to home) And as it has been speculated before in this thread - most likely the cause of the gas charges on her card by the perp.

She worked only a couple of minutes from her workplace. Going between Heatherwood Apartments and the Starbucks Drive Thru, she had two gas stations that she could get gas from between those points. There is a gas station at the corner of East Powell and SE Burnside(Space Age Fuel) as well as the new Fred Meyer Gas Station in Fred Meyer's parking lot on SE Burnside. As someone mentioned earlier, there is a cement barrier leaving Heatherwood Apartments which makes a person turn right only(SE direction), so she probably had to loop around the block to get to work. It might have been easier to gas up on her way back from work, heading SE on SE Burnside. (Hwy 26)

 

[gwenabob]

Maybe a stupid question, but isn't it spousal "privilege" that she could take if she WANTS to, but not necessarily have to. Not speaking to just this case, but if a wife chose to stay married to the suspect, but didn't want to use that privilege. Could she testify regarding anything, if she chose to? I know probably not a usual scenario, but just curious if she is prohibited from that testimony or if it is a choice.

ETA: I apologize for making you read run-on and incomplete sentences! Too tired to fix it. . .

I think it depends on the state. According to the Oregon statute posted by Salem, it appears the privilege can be claimed by either spouse:

"(2) In any civil or criminal action, a spouse has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent the other spouse from disclosing any confidential communication made by one spouse to the other during the marriage. The privilege created by this subsection may be claimed by either spouse. The authority of the spouse to claim the privilege and the claiming of the privilege is presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary."

But there are limits to this. For example, if a crime was committed against the spouse, the privilege does not exist. I don't think any of this is meaningful anyway, because I doubt he said anything of significance in this case to Amanda anyway. There would be nothing for her to disclose by way of communication. And she is entitled to speak of things he did and ways he behaved.

 

[newsjunkie]

"Oregon is a no-fault state, which means the only basis for a divorce is "irreconcilable differences between the parties have caused the irremediable breakdown of the marriage."
http://www.divorcenet.com/states/oregon/or_faq01

She worked only a couple of minutes from her workplace. Going between Heatherwood Apartments and the Starbucks Drive Thru, she had two gas stations that she could get gas from between those points. There is a gas station at the corner of East Powell and SE Burnside(Space Age Fuel) as well as the new Fred Meyer Gas Station in Fred Meyer's parking lot on SE Burnside. As someone mentioned earlier, there is a cement barrier leaving Heatherwood Apartments which makes a person turn right only(SE direction), so she probably had to loop around the block to get to work. It might have been easier to gas up on her way back from work, heading SE on SE Burnside.

Your info is most helpful. . .thanks for your posts!

 

[newsjunkie]

I think it depends on the state. According to the Oregon statute posted by Salem, it appears the privilege can be claimed by either spouse:

"(2) In any civil or criminal action, a spouse has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent the other spouse from disclosing any confidential communication made by one spouse to the other during the marriage. The privilege created by this subsection may be claimed by either spouse. The authority of the spouse to claim the privilege and the claiming of the privilege is presumed in the absence of evidence to the contrary."

But there are limits to this. For example, if a crime was committed against the spouse, the privilege does not exist. I don't think any of this is meaningful anyway, because I doubt he said anything of significance in this case to Amanda anyway. There would be nothing for her to disclose by way of communication. And she is entitled to speak of things he did and ways he behaved.

AHHH. . .thank you most kindly!

 

[La Louve]

PIM--- I think your theory of a blackmailer or other perp is very possible given how things were conventiently found, placed, and how Holt seemed to volunteer anything to LE, it seemed his frantic, worried behavior was someone wanting to get trust and protection from LE. Sort of like a child running, confessing to his parents to protect him from a bully.

I'm sorry, I just don't buy it. If he wanted to get trust and protection from LE, he could have confessed the first time he went in to be interviewed by the police. Or better yet, he could have called 911 right after he shot poor Whitney. Or better still, he could have gone to the police and reported he was being blackmailed before he set out to kill Whitney.

Talk about things not adding up!

 

[Desdemona]

Boodles, the second begs questions, too, as no one has offered they indeed saw it in his backpack Tuesday evening (eg. walking along the road, arriving home, etc.).

I think maybe there's a third alternative not yet ruled out: someone else stashed his stuff elsewhere for a bit. And then returned that computer stuff to Amanda's car at the PD that Friday during JH's 6-hr. interview.

BBM

I'm not sure an alternative theory really needs to be ruled out if it is based on an (IMO)unfounded speculation that the killer's belongings were stashed by anyone other than himself, and/or if it introduces a (IMO)highly unlikely scenario where this confessed killer is framed by unnamed mystery persons who manage to gain access to the trunk of the killer's vehicle undetected while said vehicle is under surveillance in the police station parking lot, to plant incriminating evidence -- which Holt will coincidentally admit to possessing -- while he's inside talking to police.

:twocents: IMO reasonable doubt must sound reasonable in order to be reasonable doubt!

I'm liking that good old KISS method more and more every day. *IF* the items were indeed stashed at all, which has not been established, IMO it would be far more consistent with Holt's known solo-stashing behavior (and a much more reasonable explanation) for him to have stashed the equipment himself. His obvious purpose would be to cover the lame story that he'd been robbed of the items at gunpoint.

All with due respect, and JMO.

 

[Desdemona]

She worked only a couple of minutes from her workplace. Going between Heatherwood Apartments and the Starbucks Drive Thru, she had two gas stations that she could get gas from between those points. There is a gas station at the corner of East Powell and SE Burnside(Space Age Fuel) as well as the new Fred Meyer Gas Station in Fred Meyer's parking lot on SE Burnside. As someone mentioned earlier, there is a cement barrier leaving Heatherwood Apartments which makes a person turn right only(SE direction), so she probably had to loop around the block to get to work. It might have been easier to gas up on her way back from work, heading SE on SE Burnside. (Hwy 26)

The story about Whitney having run out of gas one night was not recent; it happened back when she had first met Clint, before they began dating. HTH

ETA: The description of the area around the apartments IMO is helpful. The BBM part might IMO end up being significant, regarding the abduction that morning. The forced right turn from the apartments especially, and JH's mention of Hogan and the other street (starts with a P??), could bear looking at.

 

[Xavier]

I'm sorry, I just don't buy it. If he wanted to get trust and protection from LE, he could have confessed the first time he went in to be interviewed by the police. Or better yet, he could have called 911 right after he shot poor Whitney. Or better still, he could have gone to the police and reported he was being blackmailed before he set out to kill Whitney.

Talk about things not adding up!

IMHO just watching Holt during the crime and being incarcerated, his constant worried, fearful, even remorse for what happened to WH, behavior strikes me that's he more "secure" being in police custody. If you watch Holt's reactions, read his interviews you might see some of this and wonder too.

Having a brother with full blown schizo-affective diorder, I rule this out. But Holt could have a bi polar/histrionic manic-depressive disability. Typically associated with these disorders are the "self medicating habits" of excessive drinking, chain smoking, drugs, some extremely harsh like Meth, Crack, Heroin, even Bath Salts. And I've yet to read interviews supporting Holt having these types of habits.

I just feel Holt might be a patsy fall guy. Who and Why may/may not be proven in his trial or even discovered. But I've strong suspicions
of a higher power involved in a bigger scenario.

Holt's Dec 14th trial is soon, and hopefully complete justice and closure will bring an end to this horribly sad ordeal and the unnecessary loss of Whitney's life.