Found Deceased SC - Brittanee Drexel, 17, Myrtle Beach, 25 April 2009 - #20

[QPRfan]

I see three males and a dog. The PI states they are males as well. Would not surprise me at all if they also had their dog with them. I definitely see Brittanee in front of them.

I rewatched the “new” surveillance tape. If it is what it’s purported to be, namely video of Brittanee after leaving the Blue Water Resort, it would be the last images of her before she was taken. And if investigators truly believed it potentially showed her kidnappers, why would they keep it to themselves for ten years?? There’s nothing about the video that would hinder or corrupt the investigation, and, if anything, would’ve been potentially very helpful in spurring potential witnesses who may have seen these three “men” and their little dog on Ocean Blvd.

From what I remember, it was established that Brittanee left the Blue Water around 8:48pm and her last outgoing text was around 8:58pm. The time stamp on the video says 8:20pm. That, combined with the fact that she’s walking against traffic, makes me think the video actually shows her walking toward the Blue Water, not away from it.

Of course, there’s always the possibility the time stamp is wrong, just like the one from video from Blue Water lobby. JMO.

 

[lonetraveler]

I rewatched the “new” surveillance tape. If it is what it’s purported to be, namely video of Brittanee after leaving the Blue Water Resort, it would be the last images of her before she was taken. And if investigators truly believed it potentially showed her kidnappers, why would they keep it to themselves for ten years?? There’s nothing about the video that would hinder or corrupt the investigation, and, if anything, would’ve been potentially very helpful in spurring potential witnesses who may have seen these three “men” and their little dog on Ocean Blvd.

From what I remember, it was established that Brittanee left the Blue Water around 8:48pm and her last outgoing text was around 8:58pm. The time stamp on the video says 8:20pm. That, combined with the fact that she’s walking against traffic, makes me think the video actually shows her walking toward the Blue Water, not away from it.

Of course, there’s always the possibility the time stamp is wrong, just like the one from video from Blue Water lobby. JMO.

I don't think it is a big deal that she is walking against traffic on the sidewalk. Everyone does it down here. You don't use the sidewalk across the street just to go in the right direction.
If the "family group" is involved in the kidnapping/rape/murder and if these three men are connected to the family, then it would not surprise me if they maybe had their dog (probably a pit bull) with them. It would simply look like they are walking their dog, instead of in the process of kidnapping an unsuspecting teen to other people in the area.
ETA: I say Pit bull because the people connected to this family most likely are involved with dog fighting and any other illegal activity there is, IMO.

 

[QPRfan]

I don't think it is a big deal that she is walking against traffic on the sidewalk. Everyone does it down here. You don't use the sidewalk across the street just to go in the right direction.
If the "family group" is involved in the kidnapping/rape/murder and if these three men are connected to the family, then it would not surprise me if they maybe had their dog (probably a pit bull) with them. It would simply look like they are walking their dog, instead of in the process of kidnapping an unsuspecting teen to other people in the area.
ETA: I say Pit bull because the people connected to this family most likely are involved with dog fighting and any other illegal activity there is, IMO.

I agree, the simple act of walking against traffic is not a big deal. People do it here too, as I’m sure they do everywhere. That wasn’t my point. My point was we don’t know exactly where this video was shot from, and I’m not one to simply believe a reporter (or an investigator, especially in this case where none of the investigators have exactly covered themselves in glory) when certain details don’t make sense as presented.

When walking back to her hotel Brittanee had no reason (that we know of) to cross the street. If she stayed on the ocean side of the street, then she would be walking with traffic, not against, and, this new video would be of her walking to the Blue Water, not away from it (in line with the time stamp).

Maybe those three figures in the video are involved. Maybe, even if this video shows her walking to the Blue Water, they simply waited outside for her to come back out. Maybe she crossed the street to go someplace we are not aware of, or in an attempt to avoid people who were accosting her. I don’t know any of those answers, and I’m not sure anyone else does either. But if that video truly represents the last images of Brittanee before her abduction and investigators didn’t share it with the public, then my opinion of their abilities has dropped yet another notch, and just further explains why we’re ten years down the road and no one has been arrested.

I realize it’s a minor point in the whole scheme of things, but since we still don’t really understand how she was taken so cleanly from such a relatively busy area, I think it’s worth knowing for certain what any new piece of information really signifies. And, again, things I write are simply my own observations and my way of discussing new information, and shouldn’t be taken argumentatively.

 

[sloane7777]

Why would they split her remains up like that though? Isn't that increasing the likelihood that someone would find them?

I think he is trying to deflect he already said ST had threatened him .

 

[mocity]

I don't think it is a big deal that she is walking against traffic on the sidewalk. Everyone does it down here. You don't use the sidewalk across the street just to go in the right direction.
If the "family group" is involved in the kidnapping/rape/murder and if these three men are connected to the family, then it would not surprise me if they maybe had their dog (probably a pit bull) with them. It would simply look like they are walking their dog, instead of in the process of kidnapping an unsuspecting teen to other people in the area.
ETA: I say Pit bull because the people connected to this family most likely are involved with dog fighting and any other illegal activity there is, IMO.

Am I crazy? I can't find the "new surveillance tape" people are referring to. I watched the video with the PI but didn't anything showing Brittanee.

 

[jash]

Am I crazy? I can't find the "new surveillance tape" people are referring to. I watched the video with the PI but didn't anything showing Brittanee.

It's the first video posted below the article (thanks lonetraveler!): Exclusive: P.I. who investigated Brittanee Drexel's disappearance revisits the case (Drexel case - 5 p.m.)

The surveillance video starts around 1:00 minute. Not sure if this direct link will work:
http://sinclairstoryline.com/resour...ynk.com/9e7e34626ae349a8b98a398cbf69a3d2.m3u8

 

[mocity]

It's the first video posted below the article (thanks lonetraveler!): Exclusive: P.I. who investigated Brittanee Drexel's disappearance revisits the case (Drexel case - 5 p.m.)

The surveillance video starts around 1:00 minute. Not sure if this direct link will work:
http://sinclairstoryline.com/resour...ynk.com/9e7e34626ae349a8b98a398cbf69a3d2.m3u8

Thank you Jash!

 

[FleaSpirit]

I spent a while reading about this case and posted something on another thread but I'll make a post here too in case somebody might find it useful.
The following look likely by my amateur analysis.

1) The girl was taken by somebody she knew.
There is an abundance of evidence that she was in a sort of vulnerable state.
Evidence that she had a negative experience with a male while there.
She would have been more, not less, cautious with a stranger at the time she disappeared.
Most likely somebody who knew her and knew where she was at that moment offered her a ride.

2) The fact that her cellphone pinged south of there is probably because a person in the age range of her killer, late teens early twenties, would have taken the body in the opposite direction that he was going. If he had been heading back to Florida he would have dropped the body etc north.

3) The nonsense about the black father and son supposedly involved is silly.

The only 'real' crime the older one seems to have committed is domestic violence. His other charges mostly amount to failing to show cops the respect they think they deserve. His being black in SC and having that attitude is probably what set him up for getting accused.

The kid robbing McDonalds likewise, might look like a major crime to some people but is probably not significant.

The supposed 'jailhouse snitch' story is blatantly unlikely. It contains things that the person knew the cops would want to hear, but also contains absurdities that anybody not specifically wanting to hear something specific would see. Sort of like trying to sell something to somebody eager to buy, he knew what kind of thing they wanted to hear.

More troubling is the fact that the FBI appears to have solicited false information from him deliberately. The FBI agents probably justify this to themselves using various rationalizations, but they should be held accountable if that's what they did. The evidence does seem to point to that.

4) Since the <modsnip> kid from south of Myrtle beach, against whom there seems to be literally no credible indication of involvement, was forced to take a lie detector test, why not give a lie detector test to those people who there is specific reason to examine further?

<modsnip: unnecessary comment about race has been removed>

 

[FleaSpirit]

Some of the following is speculation. It should be obvious what is speculation and what is established and accepted generally as uncontested fact. I added some links to some things. If somebody wants a link or an explanation for something just ask.

The people being accused are obviously being put in danger. Any number of people could take the "facts" that the police and FBI have put out and decide to "reduce a threat" on their own. In fact it kind of looks like that is what the police and FBI are encouraging. If the people cited were guilty, or even probably guilty, it might be okay, but all of the evidence seems to be that they are not guilty.

If the people are killed then of course the cases will be considered solved and closed, and people will marvel at the police and FBI for protecting the public.

~

Reading some more posts on this thread, it looks like some people are ignoring some important elements.

1) The first murder, in 1998 or so, that some people are trying to connect indirectly.
There was a guy in that town who evidently had a lot of trivial "are you disrespecting me" type incidents with cops.

A girl is mirdered and the cops arrest him, despite a complete lack of evidence.

The police then arrested more and more members of his clan on the same basis. They seem to have been fishing for any crimes they could pin on them.

After a few months they release him, due to a lack of evidence.

"Detectives arrested Randall Taylor and the four others in 2001, but prosecutors dropped the murder charges, citing insufficient evidence." Police reconsider ties between Brittanee Drexel case, crimes targeting other women

2) Then the Drexel girl goes missing. There really is no reason to connect the cases, until a girl says three black guys tried to abduct her.

The police show her a bunch of photos. Strangely, they include the photo of the guy who they tried to accuse of the first murder.

Very strangely, the girl picks his photo out of the bunch.

Why strange? Because he happened to be provably very far away at the time, but the girl and the police did not know that.

"Police say picked Shaun Taylor out of lineup , and police continue to seek information about the two additional men." https://wpde.com/news/crime/arrest-made-in-botched-boulevard-abduction

So the police then get him in custody after a few days and release a statement that seems to give the impression that he has turned himself in and confessed.

" turned himself in Wednesday morning to face charges of attempted kidnapping and first degree assault." Arrest made in botched Boulevard abduction

Suddenly the first murder in 1998, as well as the Drexel killing, as well as an attempted kidnapping, are solved. As long as there are no hitches, the next step will be to polish up the cases then look for additional murders that guy committed.

But there was a hitch, the surveillance tape and other evidence that proved that the person was not physically where the police and the supposed attempted kidnapping victim said.

"Police dropped the charges when they found surveillance video showing that the elder Taylor was “40 miles away” at the time of the alleged abduction, his lawyer, Scott Joye, said in a statement at the time. " Father and Son Allegedly Implicated in Brittanee Drexel's Deadly Disappearance Have Been Arrested Before

Charges dropped for Timothy Shaun Taylor

3) At this point the FBI stepped in.

An FBI agent, or group of them, solicit information that would back up the fictional connection that was suggested by the supposed attempted kidnapping victim.

~If you feel that I am misrepresenting what the FBI did, please say so and I will explain. If you feel the 'jailhouse information' was reliable, please research it, and if you still feel it was reliable then ask me or somebody else to explain some of the problems with it.~

They get a guy in prison to claim that the son of the person who the police tried to accuse of the previous two incidents on was involved in the Drexel abduction.

Why the son?

Because there is literally no evidence, nothing, to connect him so they need a confession, and confessions are more easily obtainable from younger people. If they had to squeeze a fake confession from the father it would take a long time and they would not get a high quality confession they could videotape. He would have a lot of bruises and other injuries. Most teens can easily be walked into a believable confession for any crime whatsoever by a competent interrogator.

So the FBI arranges a false bit of info from a jailhouse person, then forwards the information until they get the boy in a position to confess.

At this point something went wrong with the plan, I don't know what. It may be that somebody wise to the situation got wind of it and put a barrier between the boy and law enforcers.

~

So now return to the Drexel case.

You have a young girl without an obvious father figure. She has a 'boyfriend' in NY who she uses as a sort of proxy father, a retreat or security figure.

She seems to resort to 'texting with her boyfriend' in lieu of the more healthy 'retreating to her father', which is not available to her.

So it is a fair guess that when she feels uncomfortable around a guy she will start texting to her 'boyfriend'.

Therefore, it is likely that she was in the presence of a male figure, or figures, the last time she texted, which seems to be when she disappeared.

The fact that she did not mention them to her proxy father, her boyfriend, while she was texting, indicates that the male, or males, were potential competitors for the role her boyfriend was playing, in other words she was not with several males of a different race.

The circumstances seem to indicate that she would have been in a car, and at some point physically restrained. Since a driver has difficulty driving and restraining at the same time, there were probably several people.

This is the first logical scenario that arises from the evidence so far. Unless some evidence arises that puts things in a different direction, it does not make sense to waste effort trying to support other silliness that was put forward by the FBI or local police.

A fair summary article Every Twist And Turn In The Disappearance Of 17-Year-Old Brittanee Drexel

The links posted cover a lot of things but if a person wants a link or an explanation that is not here then ask.

 

[Murkywaters]

No. The Taylor family have been abducting and murdering females, particularly white females since at least 1998.

Shannon McConaughey was abducted just as she was leaving the Cracker Barrel in North Charleston. Randall Keith Taylor was one of four men charged with her murder. One co-defendant told investigators Randall Taylor raped and shot McConaughey. Her car was found abandoned and burned two weeks later in woods near McClellanville and her body was found in the woods in Awendaw, SC 12 minutes from McClellanville. In 2010, Randa Massey nearly abducted while walking on Ocean Boulevard near the BlueWater Resort when a van creeped up behind her. Two men jumped from the van and tried to pull her in. She identified Shaun Taylor, but I've seen posts stating she may have got the identification wrong. I personally think the sketch looks a lot more like Timothy Shaun Taylor then ST.

And then's there's Crystal Soles who disappeared from a corner store in Andrews, SC in 2005. She was walking home. Andrews is just a 44 minute drive from McClellanville.

There is clearly a correlation to these disappearances. All the same type of victims, the same MO, in the same general area. I have no doubt there are probably more victims out there.

 

[PrairieWind]

I spent a while reading about this case and posted something on another thread but I'll make a post here too in case somebody might find it useful.
The following look likely by my amateur analysis.

1) The girl was taken by somebody she knew.
There is an abundance of evidence that she was in a sort of vulnerable state.
Evidence that she had a negative experience with a male while there.
She would have been more, not less, cautious with a stranger at the time she disappeared.
Most likely somebody who knew her and knew where she was at that moment offered her a ride.

2) The fact that her cellphone pinged south of there is probably because a person in the age range of her killer, late teens early twenties, would have taken the body in the opposite direction that he was going. If he had been heading back to Florida he would have dropped the body etc north.

3) The nonsense about the black father and son supposedly involved is silly.

The only 'real' crime the older one seems to have committed is domestic violence. His other charges mostly amount to failing to show cops the respect they think they deserve. His being black in SC and having that attitude is probably what set him up for getting accused.

The kid robbing McDonalds likewise, might look like a major crime to some people but is probably not significant.

The supposed 'jailhouse snitch' story is blatantly unlikely. It contains things that the person knew the cops would want to hear, but also contains absurdities that anybody not specifically wanting to hear something specific would see. Sort of like trying to sell something to somebody eager to buy, he knew what kind of thing they wanted to hear.

More troubling is the fact that the FBI appears to have solicited false information from him deliberately. The FBI agents probably justify this to themselves using various rationalizations, but they should be held accountable if that's what they did. The evidence does seem to point to that.

4) Since the <modsnip> kid from south of Myrtle beach, against whom there seems to be literally no credible indication of involvement, was forced to take a lie detector test, why not give a lie detector test to those people who there is specific reason to examine further?

<modsnip: unnecessary comment about race has been removed>

Give a lie detector test to who? I am confused?

 

[FleaSpirit]

No. The Taylor family have been abducting and murdering females, particularly white females since at least 1998.

Shannon McConaughey was abducted just as she was leaving the Cracker Barrel in North Charleston. Randall Keith Taylor was one of four men charged with her murder. One co-defendant told investigators Randall Taylor raped and shot McConaughey. Her car was found abandoned and burned two weeks later in woods near McClellanville and her body was found in the woods in Awendaw, SC 12 minutes from McClellanville. In 2010, Randa Massey nearly abducted while walking on Ocean Boulevard near the BlueWater Resort when a van creeped up behind her. Two men jumped from the van and tried to pull her in. She identified Shaun Taylor, but I've seen posts stating she may have got the identification wrong. I personally think the sketch looks a lot more like Timothy Shaun Taylor then ST.

And then's there's Crystal Soles who disappeared from a corner store in Andrews, SC in 2005. She was walking home. Andrews is just a 44 minute drive from McClellanville.

There is clearly a correlation to these disappearances. All the same type of victims, the same MO, in the same general area. I have no doubt there are probably more victims out there.

If you go to "The Charlie Project" website, and click on "South Carolina" you will see that there are a staggering number of missing persons in South Carolina. Also from the news you can see a very high number of killings that have occured in recent years, a number of them young women.
Shannon McConaughey was killed by somebody. Normally there would be an investigation by somebody who has that job, and the evidence would be lain out and a person could look at the evidence and try to guess who did it.

Unfortunately, in the Shannon McConaughey case, the police decided who they wanted to charge with the crime, before they did the investigation. They were investigating not with the intention of "finding" the killer but of proving they had arrested the right person.

So, while they were investigating that colored their actions.

When they finally finished investigating they gathered up all of the evidence they had collected against those individuals. There wasn't any.

~

As for "One co-defendant told investigators ... raped and shot McConaughey.", it's very easy to get somebody to say what you want them to say when you have physical control of them and their environment. In some places the police have refined this to an evil art. They put a person in a small cage for weeks or months or longer and carefully cultivate the story they want, using the complete physical control of the environment they have.

Any good historian will tell you that there have been many countries in recent history that have brought the art of getting untrue facts from prisoners to perfection. Even generations ago there were experts who could get anybody to say literally anything. Today unhealthy individuals in governments have studied that more precisely and it can almost always be done without physically harming the person, simply by using psychological pressures. You can watch videos on YouTube of false confessions to get an example.

One case that I noticed recently in a documentary was interesting. A young Swedish guy, Malthe Johansen, was accused of a sex crime at a school. The police did not want to spend weeks and weeks investigating, so they decided to shortcut things. He had been raised by two women, so the police sent two female police officers to talk to him, thinking he would be more likely to cooperate with them. They told him that they had video proof that he had commited the crime. He said that he did not remember it, but if they had video proof then he must have done it as a split personality or something. The two women then asked him if he would be willing to sign a confession, even though he didn't remember commiting the crime. Since it was two women, he said "of course" and signed the confession. Eventually he was exonerated, but he died shortly after. In his country in Scandanavia there appear to be a number of videos and articles about his case that you can look at if you speak Viking, or you can run them through Google Translate.

~

As for "There is clearly a correlation to these disappearances." Yes, there clearly is. This large number of murders and kidnappings etc did not spring up out of the ground, they were caused by something. You would ask a sociologist who has studied that kind of thing to speculate about that.
When there is an individual murder, or group of murders commited by one person, and you want to see the 'cause' or what connects them, you would ask a psychologist to speculate about that.

You mention Crystal Soles too. You might go to the "Charlie Project" website and look at the page on South Carolina and gather all the cases that might seem to have been from a single cause, in this case young women who were probably attacked for a reason involving the fact that they were young women. You may find more and more cases that seem to be very closely related, and if they are solved the killers will have certain things in common.

 

[sloane7777]

Some of the following is speculation. It should be obvious what is speculation and what is established and accepted generally as uncontested fact. I added some links to some things. If somebody wants a link or an explanation for something just ask.

The people being accused are obviously being put in danger. Any number of people could take the "facts" that the police and FBI have put out and decide to "reduce a threat" on their own. In fact it kind of looks like that is what the police and FBI are encouraging. If the people cited were guilty, or even probably guilty, it might be okay, but all of the evidence seems to be that they are not guilty.

If the people are killed then of course the cases will be considered solved and closed, and people will marvel at the police and FBI for protecting the public.

~

Reading some more posts on this thread, it looks like some people are ignoring some important elements.

1) The first murder, in 1998 or so, that some people are trying to connect indirectly.
There was a guy in that town who evidently had a lot of trivial "are you disrespecting me" type incidents with cops.

A girl is mirdered and the cops arrest him, despite a complete lack of evidence.

The police then arrested more and more members of his clan on the same basis. They seem to have been fishing for any crimes they could pin on them.

After a few months they release him, due to a lack of evidence.

"Detectives arrested Randall Taylor and the four others in 2001, but prosecutors dropped the murder charges, citing insufficient evidence." Police reconsider ties between Brittanee Drexel case, crimes targeting other women

2) Then the Drexel girl goes missing. There really is no reason to connect the cases, until a girl says three black guys tried to abduct her.

The police show her a bunch of photos. Strangely, they include the photo of the guy who they tried to accuse of the first murder.

Very strangely, the girl picks his photo out of the bunch.

Why strange? Because he happened to be provably very far away at the time, but the girl and the police did not know that.

"Police say picked Shaun Taylor out of lineup , and police continue to seek information about the two additional men." Arrest made in botched Boulevard abduction

So the police then get him in custody after a few days and release a statement that seems to give the impression that he has turned himself in and confessed.

" turned himself in Wednesday morning to face charges of attempted kidnapping and first degree assault." Arrest made in botched Boulevard abduction

Suddenly the first murder in 1998, as well as the Drexel killing, as well as an attempted kidnapping, are solved. As long as there are no hitches, the next step will be to polish up the cases then look for additional murders that guy committed.

But there was a hitch, the surveillance tape and other evidence that proved that the person was not physically where the police and the supposed attempted kidnapping victim said.

"Police dropped the charges when they found surveillance video showing that the elder Taylor was “40 miles away” at the time of the alleged abduction, his lawyer, Scott Joye, said in a statement at the time. " Father and Son Allegedly Implicated in Brittanee Drexel's Deadly Disappearance Have Been Arrested Before

Charges dropped for Timothy Shaun Taylor

3) At this point the FBI stepped in.

An FBI agent, or group of them, solicit information that would back up the fictional connection that was suggested by the supposed attempted kidnapping victim.

~If you feel that I am misrepresenting what the FBI did, please say so and I will explain. If you feel the 'jailhouse information' was reliable, please research it, and if you still feel it was reliable then ask me or somebody else to explain some of the problems with it.~

They get a guy in prison to claim that the son of the person who the police tried to accuse of the previous two incidents on was involved in the Drexel abduction.

Why the son?

Because there is literally no evidence, nothing, to connect him so they need a confession, and confessions are more easily obtainable from younger people. If they had to squeeze a fake confession from the father it would take a long time and they would not get a high quality confession they could videotape. He would have a lot of bruises and other injuries. Most teens can easily be walked into a believable confession for any crime whatsoever by a competent interrogator.

So the FBI arranges a false bit of info from a jailhouse person, then forwards the information until they get the boy in a position to confess.

At this point something went wrong with the plan, I don't know what. It may be that somebody wise to the situation got wind of it and put a barrier between the boy and law enforcers.

~

So now return to the Drexel case.

You have a young girl without an obvious father figure. She has a 'boyfriend' in NY who she uses as a sort of proxy father, a retreat or security figure.

She seems to resort to 'texting with her boyfriend' in lieu of the more healthy 'retreating to her father', which is not available to her.

So it is a fair guess that when she feels uncomfortable around a guy she will start texting to her 'boyfriend'.

Therefore, it is likely that she was in the presence of a male figure, or figures, the last time she texted, which seems to be when she disappeared.

The fact that she did not mention them to her proxy father, her boyfriend, while she was texting, indicates that the male, or males, were potential competitors for the role her boyfriend was playing, in other words she was not with several males of a different race.

The circumstances seem to indicate that she would have been in a car, and at some point physically restrained. Since a driver has difficulty driving and restraining at the same time, there were probably several people.

This is the first logical scenario that arises from the evidence so far. Unless some evidence arises that puts things in a different direction, it does not make sense to waste effort trying to support other silliness that was put forward by the FBI or local police.

A fair summary article Every Twist And Turn In The Disappearance Of 17-Year-Old Brittanee Drexel

The links posted cover a lot of things but if a person wants a link or an explanation that is not here then ask.

As we have all researched this case for years I just have to ask are you a friend of the Ts? no one we have mentioned is anywhere near innocent. FBI doesn't think so PI's don't think so, Her Parents don't think so Have you read warrants , ST has been arrested over 37 times , 2 of the men who killed Shannon admitted what happened. All corroborated Law enforcement are Silly ? there was another attempted kidnapping , the phone pinged directly to them I don't think the FBI just dreamed this up , Even these guys Social Media is beyond scary . they have evidence we don't know what it is they clearly stated they are waiting for the one thing that will push this over the edge do you think they are that wrong ? I don't think any of it is silliness. IMO

 

[sloane7777]

Give a lie detector test to who? I am confused?

DT took a lie detector test and failed .

 

[FleaSpirit]

Give a lie detector test to who? I am confused?

The son of their primary 'suspect' was given a lie detector test with the intention of 'proving' he was guilty.

The police gave him a supposed 'lie detector test' then the media was told he had failed it.

Lie detector tests have baselines and if a person shows stress outside the baseline range for a certain answer then it indicates they are conflicted about the answer.

In the case of this test, a similar degree of stress was shown when he was asked what his name was and said whatever his name is. In other words he was also "lying" about what his name was according to the expert. In fact he simply did not trust the people he was dealing with, and he had very good cause to not trust them, as evidence by what followed the test.

The point was that he, a person against whom there seems to be no evidence, was given a lie detector test and elaborate steps were taken to paint him as the killer.

Meanwhile, if you look at the evidence in the case there is a more natural pool of suspects who could have been targeted with such tactics.

~

Who could have been "given a lie detector" or otherwise targeted?

There were two hotels involved. In those hotels were several groups of young men who had vehicles and traveled as a pack.

It seems like common sense to gather a list of each pack of young men, and "give them a lie detector test" or whatever it is they want to do to investigate.

It does not seem sensible to examine only somebody who most likely was not involved in the crime.

Doesn't it seem sensible that if you are going to examine somebody who probably was not involved, that you should also examine others who probably were involved?

 

[FleaSpirit]

As we have all researched this case for years I just have to ask are you a friend of the Ts? no one we have mentioned is anywhere near innocent. FBI doesn't think so PI's don't think so, Her Parents don't think so Have you read warrants , ST has been arrested over 37 times , 2 of the men who killed Shannon admitted what happened. All corroborated Law enforcement are Silly ? there was another attempted kidnapping , the phone pinged directly to them I don't think the FBI just dreamed this up , Even these guys Social Media is beyond scary . they have evidence we don't know what it is they clearly stated they are waiting for the one thing that will push this over the edge do you think they are that wrong ? I don't think any of it is silliness. IMO

I am not a friend of anybody involved, as far as I know. I am not sure if I have ever been to Myrtle beach but I have probably passed through there decades ago. As far as I know, I do not have any connection to anybody involved.

~

You say "ST has been arrested over 37 times".

Could you please look at the specifics? The arrests indicate he was not friendly to cops i.e., he did not say "yes sir, no sir". They don't indicate a tendency to kidnap and kill college students.

If you want to list the 37 things in list form like
1)
2)
etc
it might be easier to see what they indicate.

 

[PrairieWind]

The son of their primary 'suspect' was given a lie detector test with the intention of 'proving' he was guilty.

The police gave him a supposed 'lie detector test' then the media was told he had failed it.

Lie detector tests have baselines and if a person shows stress outside the baseline range for a certain answer then it indicates they are conflicted about the answer.

In the case of this test, a similar degree of stress was shown when he was asked what his name was and said whatever his name is. In other words he was also "lying" about what his name was according to the expert. In fact he simply did not trust the people he was dealing with, and he had very good cause to not trust them, as evidence by what followed the test.

The point was that he, a person against whom there seems to be no evidence, was given a lie detector test and elaborate steps were taken to paint him as the killer.

Meanwhile, if you look at the evidence in the case there is a more natural pool of suspects who could have been targeted with such tactics.

~

Who could have been "given a lie detector" or otherwise targeted?

There were two hotels involved. In those hotels were several groups of young men who had vehicles and traveled as a pack.

It seems like common sense to gather a list of each pack of young men, and "give them a lie detector test" or whatever it is they want to do to investigate.

It does not seem sensible to examine only somebody who most likely was not involved in the crime.

Doesn't it seem sensible that if you are going to examine somebody who probably was not involved, that you should also examine others who probably were involved?

Where are the lie detector results? I have not seen them.

 

[FleaSpirit]

Where are the lie detector results? I have not seen them.

As far as I know all that is available are media reports about the results. The media has reported that he failed the test, at least one media report includes that he failed when asked his name and at least one report says that his attorney was present and "confirmed" that he had failed the test by glancing at the results while it was in progress.

This last point is important, about his attorney "confirming" his failure of the test.

Lie detector tests are interpretive. They are not "absolute".

You look at the results and take into account as many variables as you have access to.

If a mosquito lands on a person's nose when they are answering a question, it will show up on the test. If the questioner did not see the mosquito it might be interpreted as indicating 'deception'.

The attorney, of course, was not capable of affirming the validity of the failure. In other words his attorney was lying to him in order to coax him towards admitting guilt.

A simple minded person might say "but he would not affirm guilt if he were not guilty".

In fact it is astonishingly easy to get anybody to admit guilt to anything. This has been proven again, and again, and again, and again, in many countries, including the U.S.

Some people are much more prone to be easily indicating guilt, others less prone, but any individual can be targeted with that tactic.

~

In the case of a lie detector test, of course "indicating guilt on a lie detector test" is not the same as "confessing".

In this case though you have a young person who can be steered toward the interpretation that is 'consensus'. In other words if he is part of a group of people who believe "abc" then he can be more easily steered to believing "abc".

The lie detector test administrator, alone, might not be enough to convince him, against his own senses, that he is lying, but when you add his attorney in then you have a) a supposed 'expert' lie detector plus b) his own lawyer, his 'ally', who have a certain opinion. This would tend to push him towards accepting and looking for a way to rationalize the reality of that 'opinion'.

In this particular case they were not able to extract a false confession, but in most cases, if the interrogator is competent, it is easy.

But the fact that they tried indicates that all other of their efforts should be viewed under the cloud of "they are targeting an individual, rather than looking for the truth".

That appears to be what is going on.

 

[PrairieWind]

As far as I know all that is available are media reports about the results. The media has reported that he failed the test, at least one media report includes that he failed when asked his name and at least one report says that his attorney was present and "confirmed" that he had failed the test by glancing at the results while it was in progress.

This last point is important, about his attorney "confirming" his failure of the test.

Lie detector tests are interpretive. They are not "absolute".

You look at the results and take into account as many variables as you have access to.

If a mosquito lands on a person's nose when they are answering a question, it will show up on the test. If the questioner did not see the mosquito it might be interpreted as indicating 'deception'.

The attorney, of course, was not capable of affirming the validity of the failure. In other words his attorney was lying to him in order to coax him towards admitting guilt.

A simple minded person might say "but he would not affirm guilt if he were not guilty".

In fact it is astonishingly easy to get anybody to admit guilt to anything. This has been proven again, and again, and again, and again, in many countries, including the U.S.

Some people are much more prone to be easily indicating guilt, others less prone, but any individual can be targeted with that tactic.

His attorney is full of crap. It is the attorney that said he failed the question on the name. And he says he knows that because he glanced over and saw the machine. That is total BS. That is not how polygraphs exams work. Additionally, he NEVER should have allowed his client to take a polygraph. That was just stupid. I agree polygraphs are interpretive and that is why they are not admissible in court. But the methods used by skilled examiners are really remarkable. Your mosquito analogy is incorrect. If an answer tends to show deception, the examiner will later on circle questions back around and revisit that subject several times. If the person shows no deception later, the question is deemed answered truthfully. If he again shows deception, then he is deemed deceptive. He is answers again once truthfully and once showing deception the subject question is deemed inconclusive.
You indicated that the FBI should be giving lie detector tests to people that are most likely involved. Who would that be?

 

[FleaSpirit]

His attorney is full of crap. It is the attorney that said he failed the question on the name. And he says he knows that because he glanced over and saw the machine. That is total BS. That is not how polygraphs exams work. Additionally, he NEVER should have allowed his client to take a polygraph. That was just stupid. I agree polygraphs are interpretive and that is why they are not admissible in court. But the methods used by skilled examiners are really remarkable. Your mosquito analogy is incorrect. If an answer tends to show deception, the examiner will later on circle questions back around and revisit that subject several times. If the person shows no deception later, the question is deemed answered truthfully. If he again shows deception, then he is deemed deceptive. He is answers again once truthfully and once showing deception the subject question is deemed inconclusive.
You indicated that the FBI should be giving lie detector tests to people that are most likely involved. Who would that be?

You say "Additionally, he NEVER should have allowed his client to take a polygraph."

Actually, if the investigators had been honest people there would have been no harm.

You say "If an answer tends to show deception, the examiner will later on circle questions back around and revisit that subject several times."

That is true ideally, but if you look at media reports, they indicate that he was only asked a few specific questions once apparently.

The purpose was not "to find out what happened accurately".

The purpose was "to cultivate exam results that shoed deception", in furtherance of whatever motives the investigators had.

You say "You indicated that the FBI should be giving lie detector tests to people that are most likely involved. Who would that be? "

A common sense way to start that investigation would be to go to the hotels involved, get a list of all males traveling in a group of two or more, look among those males for who might have had conversations with the girl, then you have a pool of people who you can "give a lie detector test to".