GUILTY TX - Christina Morris, 23, Plano, 30 August 2014 - #32 *Arrest*

[daisytrail]

Regarding the Sexual Assault: why can't it be SA as the motive? Not that the SA occurred in the parking garage. To me, this is what LE is saying.

One scenario: he subdues her, puts her in the trunk while in the parking garage. Easily doable in the time frame given. He drives to his house or other location to commit what motivated him in the first place, SA.



All my opinion only.

Can there not be more than one motive? They'd been in the same scene together. They had friends in common. He (EA) may have personally (even secretly) disliked her. There may have been issues with her friends. Also, certain drugs make people very paranoid. I mean the drugs themselves do this and not just that people grow paranoid because they are doing something illegal. They also worry a lot over CIs and narcs.

ETA: There could have been an SA that was more a crime of opportunity as well.

 

[brado]

Nope. We don't know the question that was asked, so we don't know the extent of the answer given.

The tweet (limited characters, sent in a hurry to give a quick snippet) said: "There is no evidence of sexual assault...." But the other half of that same quick tweet was in the context of DNA evidence.

So, was it
1 an answer to a blanket question being asked about any evidence, and of any time that night,
2 a personal opinion,
3 a fact,
4 asked to offer the belief of LE in general,
5 or only of this one witness?
6 or simply a question about what this DNA evidence tells and doesn't?

We really don't know enough to answer any of those 6 questions with certainty. So we don't really know the extent of what the detective was saying as to their SA evidence (or lack of same). For all we know, she was simply saying that the DNA evidence itself can't tell us if a SA occurred or not.

If we had a transcript, we'd know the rest of the story. But for now, we don't.

Last part BBM

That is exactly my understanding of what the detective was conveying. Not that SA could not have occurred, just that the DNA they have does not prove that. Usually need a body or corroborating witnesses for that.

 

[CookieM]

I thought it was a fair question as there continues to be posters who think he is innocent. I would like to hear their thoughts as well.

As for the number of times the original suspect did not end up being the responsible party, I think that does apply to this case. Didn't we all have Hunter tried and convicted at the beginning?

Not me. My first theory was that she went with EA somewhere to buy or sell drugs and she OD'd and the people at the new location flipped out and he had to hide to body. Originally I thought he was driving toward Anna (the town) until I found out about the pings back in Plano. I also thought he might have hidden some if her belongings in the Trip Tunnels in Allen.

 

[frisson]

You specifically brought up posters proclaiming EA's guilt before he was "convicted in a court of law".

No, someone else mentioned that this site is not a "court of law." I agreed that it is not. And I also said that EA is not guilty yet... in a court of law bc where else is someone going to be legally guilty? Gees, my point is that the posts about law are interesting to me and are applicable to this case.. especially since yesterday pages and pages here were devoted to court statements and proceedings. (and thank you for that, those who posted) Some stated otherwise and that is fine too. Finding Christina is the goal, but justice for her is also the goal imo even if she is not found. Some people are not ready to declare someone guilty yet without more evidence and details and I think that's permissible. That's what I was saying. Apologies for being unclear.

 

[brado]

Don't jump on me with both feet, but isn't LE saying SA was the "intent"? IMO, it was but he didn't get that far because she fought back. Maybe the DA will change the AK charge to murder. Let's all keep praying they find Christina soon, she can tell us. Poor baby girl.

And absolutely total thanks to CATPATROL - don't know how you do it, but I am so grateful.

BBM

Thanks. That is exactly what I was trying to get across from my earlier posts. You stated it much more clearly.

 

[Quailfoot]

Nope. We don't know the question that was asked, so we don't know the extent of the answer given.

The tweet (limited characters, sent in a hurry to give a quick snippet) said: "There is no evidence of sexual assault...." But the other half of that same quick tweet was on the import of the DNA evidence.

So, was it
1 an answer to a blanket question being asked about any evidence, and of any time that night,
2 a personal opinion,
3 a fact,
4 asked to offer the belief of LE in general,
5 or only of this one witness?
6 or simply a question about what this DNA evidence tells and doesn't?
7 including evidence they aren't yet sure of because they are still running tests?
and so on

We really don't know enough to answer any of those 7 questions with certainty. So we don't really know the extent of what the detective was saying as to their SA evidence (or lack of same). For all we know, she was simply saying that the DNA evidence itself can't tell us if a SA occurred or not.

If we had a transcript, we'd know the rest of the story. But for now, we don't.

Yes, but the same detective, when questioned by prosecution, said she "absolutely" believes EA killed CM.

Okay, so again, if say that you believe that, but also say that you have no evidence of SA, why are you still messing around with AK? Go for murder, I say. You have the DNA now inside the trunk and an expert to say it's likely blood...what are you waiting for?

This is the only reason I still think there may be a third party involved, and that the investigators are trying to clear that up before going on with a murder charge. Otherwise, why wait? If you believe he killed her, and acted alone in doing so, what possible reason could there be to wait or waste time with a lesser charge?

There are people here we are supposed to sleuth and others we cannot. I personally don't believe the investigators have ruled any of them out at this point.

 

[txyorkiemom]

Which is why I think the SA scenario is farfetched and that they should be trying him for murder instead. The one detective said that they have no evidence of SA, but that she believe EA killed her.

Okay. So, why are we messing around in AK when the detectives believe it was murder? There are cases with murder convictions without the body; AK, not so much.

BBM-
JMO!!!!
Bravo QF- I agree with that 100%. If LE believes EA Murdered CM ..Then Charge Him with That (MURDER). IMO~ no need to waste time on AK charges.JMO~

 

[hockeymom4]

I agree with the car damage, bruises, probably his DNA mixed with hers in his trunk, that it didn't happen that way. I just thought that SA was the motive - according to my interpretation of what the PPD was saying.

Also, my definition of sexual assault must be completely different that yours.

It isn't my definition, I am going by the legal definition. Sexual assault means a lot of things. I didn't literally mean he put his finger on her shoulder and hugged her that means sexual assault.

WHAT IS SEXUAL ASSAULT?

Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape.

http://www.justice.gov/ovw/sexual-assault

 

[brado]

Yes, but the same detective, when questioned by prosecution, said she "absolutely" believes EA killed CM.

Okay, so again, if say that you believe that, but also say that you have no evidence of SA, why are you still messing around with AK? Go for murder, I say. You have the DNA now inside the trunk and an expert to say it's likely blood...what are you waiting for?

This is the only reason I still think there may be a third party involved, and that the investigators are trying to clear that up before going on with a murder charge. Otherwise, why wait? If you believe he killed her, and acted alone in doing so, what possible reason could there be to wait or waste time with a lesser charge?

There are people here we are supposed to sleuth and others we cannot. I personally don't believe the investigators have ruled any of them out at this point.

I believe they are waiting for the DNA results to come back from the lab for the other DNA hit they found in the trunk. In addition, I would bet they are still gathering/processing evidence. And of course they are hoping to find CM. They will not even consider filing murder charges on EA until all of the DNA evidence has been processed (IMO).

 

[SteveS]

Yes, but ....

Okay, so again, if say that you believe that, but also say that you have no evidence of SA, why are you still messing around with AK?

....

There is no "yes, but."

Yes is accepting the point that we don't really know if they have zero, a little, some, or a mountain of SA evidence. And if they have a mountain, why would we ever suggest they drop the case?

The value of the AK case is that they can line up a slew of lesser includeds, pursue multiple aggravating factors, and let the clock roll on the fact that CM is missing. In time, you can add the murder charge, but without a body or a nasty murder scene, you probably need the evidence of "hasn't been seen for ____ months, after last being seen with EA" to put him on death row. But don't get premature, take your time, and use the AK to keep him locked up and off the streets.

In addition, adding weeks or months before adding the murder charge, allows the possibility that her body will be found in the interim. Find the body, and he's toast. (If he's ever going to cop a plea, that window will slam shut if she's found.)

 

[brado]

It isn't my definition, I am going by the legal definition. Sexual assault means a lot of things. I didn't literally mean he put his finger on her shoulder and hugged her that means sexual assault.

WHAT IS SEXUAL ASSAULT?

Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape.

http://www.justice.gov/ovw/sexual-assault

You used the term "hitting on her" in relation to SA in an earlier post. That's what I was referring to as my definition being different. I see hitting on her as "hey baby, wanna go do some good rock?" and SA as groping, forcing himself on her, etc. That's all I meant by definitions being different.

Also, is your link for the state of Texas?

 

[hockeymom4]

You used the term "hitting on her" in relation to SA in an earlier post. That's what I was referring to as my definition being different. I see hitting on her as "hey baby, wanna go do some good rock?" and SA as groping, forcing himself on her, etc. That's all I meant by definitions being different.

Also, is your link for the state of Texas?

And I explained what I meant. It was in that same post you replied to for clarification...I said, him touching her. My link is for the entire US. It is the DOJ site. The Goverment, they are over every state. This is accurate information, as this was provided to me when I was SA years ago.

 

[darring21]

Yes, but the same detective, when questioned by prosecution, said she "absolutely" believes EA killed CM.

Okay, so again, if say that you believe that, but also say that you have no evidence of SA, why are you still messing around with AK? Go for murder, I say. You have the DNA now inside the trunk and an expert to say it's likely blood...what are you waiting for?

This is the only reason I still think there may be a third party involved, and that the investigators are trying to clear that up before going on with a murder charge. Otherwise, why wait? If you believe he killed her, and acted alone in doing so, what possible reason could there be to wait or waste time with a lesser charge?

There are people here we are supposed to sleuth and others we cannot. I personally don't believe the investigators have ruled any of them out at this point.

You keep saying that but the original tweet was corrected to say that "They're trying to make the point in general. That DNA doesn't always mean assault."

This has been pointed out to you before yet you keep repeating it. It seems a little deceptive.

 

[minor4th]

Yes, but the same detective, when questioned by prosecution, said she "absolutely" believes EA killed CM.

Okay, so again, if say that you believe that, but also say that you have no evidence of SA, why are you still messing around with AK? Go for murder, I say. You have the DNA now inside the trunk and an expert to say it's likely blood...what are you waiting for?

This is the only reason I still think there may be a third party involved, and that the investigators are trying to clear that up before going on with a murder charge. Otherwise, why wait? If you believe he killed her, and acted alone in doing so, what possible reason could there be to wait or waste time with a lesser charge?

There are people here we are supposed to sleuth and others we cannot. I personally don't believe the investigators have ruled any of them out at this point.

From what I read, the state believes it is a capital murder case, but the investigation is still open and they don't have probable cause yet for the murder charge. I believe the murder charge will come in time.

ETA: Ag Kidnapping is not a lesser charge, it's just a different charge.

 

[brado]

And I explained what I meant. It was in that same post you replied to for clarification...I said, him touching her. My link is for the entire US. It is the DOJ site. The Goverment, they are over every state. This is accurate information, as this was provided to me when I was SA years ago.

For your edification, the State of Texas definition : http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/22.011.00.html

 

[Happyshoes]

BBM-
JMO!!!!
Bravo QF- I agree with that 100%. If LE believes EA Murdered CM ..Then Charge Him with That (MURDER). IMO~ no need to waste time on AK charges.JMO~

I agree, too - and Quailfoot may have a point in that they (LE) are waiting on some other results or dna tests and hopefully they will change the charge.

 

[Eileen730]

I doubt he had to coerce anyone to buy or take those drugs, though.

Sorry I will not defend a drug dealer.
IMO he is a very bad man!

 

[Balor51]

And I explained what I meant. It was in that same post you replied to for clarification...I said, him touching her. My link is for the entire US. It is the DOJ site. The Goverment, they are over every state. This is accurate information, as this was provided to me when I was SA years ago.

I'm so very sorry you had that happen. Thank you for the link. Hugs

 

[hockeymom4]

For your edification, the State of Texas definition : http://law.onecle.com/texas/penal/22.011.00.html

I am good and need no further information. I provided to you what the DOJ states is SA. This is accurate information. Unless you found something that was incorrect? Please let me know if you did. I have the specifics for my state as well, as I went through this myself over 16 years ago.

 

[CookieM]

From what I read, the state believes it is a capital murder case, but the investigation is still open and they don't have probable cause yet for the murder charge. I believe the murder charge will come in time.

ETA: Ag Kidnapping is not a lesser charge, it's just a different charge.

Hallelujah! A verified attorney!! Welcome!
I am curious: if LE is using someone's phone for evidence in one case, would another group of LE be able to use the same phone records for evidence in another totally different case? Or would using it for evidence in the second case possibly interfere with the first? As in possibly reveal info that LE does not want revealed too soon?
Any input, minor4th?