TX - Dr. Kendra Hatcher, 35, killed in parking garage, Dallas, 2 Sept 2015 - #1

[DexterMorgan]

That story has the Jeep following Kenda's car into the garage. From the article: Police said a Jeep Cherokee followed Hatcher into the parking garage through the garage’s gate.

Then there was this article:

Sometime before Hatcher arrived home, the driver of a Jeep Cherokee followed another driver into the garage and parked, according to Sgt. Max Geron, with the Dallas Police Department's Crimes Against Persons Division.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/Wo...erokee-Wanted-by-Dallas-Police-324191061.html

Agree. I heard she followed another driver in before doc arrived. Plus she borrowed the car. Why would a thief ask you for help when you don't have a car. Unless the thief is her boyfriend and told her to borrow the car.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Police don't often make formal statements in cases; some will, most don't. The warrant says they corroborated the fact of another person--nothing wishy washy about that. Why take what might be perceived as a somewhat vague statement and then make something else up entirely out of zero facts is what I can never figure out. I can see waiting for some kind of confirmation, but making up a story based on no facts and only based on imagination when there is something more definitive than that in a legal court document? That never makes sense to me.

I think they said that they confirmed the story of the male or person that she borrowed the car from.

 

[verbonica]

No matter how many times the police say there was a specific fact corroborated (in this case it's a separate shooter, male) there is always some segment of the population who, for whatever reason, refuse to believe the facts as disclosed and then create their own fantasy version. Why this happens I have no idea; it certainly doesn't help solve the case.

A couple of reasons perhaps:

1. Some people just don't keep up with the reports.

2. Cases have gone all the way to court trials and the "corroboration" or eyewitness reports are found to be incorrect.

 

[jjenny]

Police don't often make formal statements in cases; some will, most don't. The warrant says they corroborated the fact of another person--nothing wishy washy about that. Why take what might be perceived as a somewhat vague statement and then make something else up entirely out of zero facts is what I can never figure out. I can see waiting for some kind of confirmation, but making up a story based on no facts and only based on imagination when there is something more definitive than that in a legal court document? That never makes sense to me.

It's not clear to me at all that police claim they corroborated the story that there was another person present. Warrant certainly doesn't say anything about any other witnesses seeing that man, etc.

 

[eucalyptuz]

Police don't often make formal statements in cases; some will, most don't. The warrant says they corroborated the fact of another person--nothing wishy washy about that. Why take what might be perceived as a somewhat vague statement and then make something else up entirely out of zero facts is what I can never figure out. I can see waiting for some kind of confirmation, but making up a story based on no facts and only based on imagination when there is something more definitive than that in a legal court document? That never makes sense to me.

Thanks. I can only suggest that you reply to these people coming up with the unlikely scenarios with a response including linked facts. Maybe they are less up-to-date than some. Maybe they have heard false information. Maybe they don't think the things they hear are always 100% correct.

 

[Coquette]

It is possible that the police already have the male suspect/shooter in custody and have not released any information yet. It would explain the absolute stand down on any additional information being released about him, including the suspect's physical description. She clearly saw the man and knows what he looks like and may every well know him personally. If there is truly a third party that hired CC and the male shooter, as per her "story," and he/she is still at large, then the added step of placing her minor child in protective custody makes perfect sense. I suspect the police have a clearer picture of things at this point and are not offering it up for public consumption just yet. MOO.

 

[Inthedetails]

It's not clear to me at all that police claim they corroborated the story that there was another person present. Warrant certainly doesn't say anything about any other witnesses seeing that man, etc.

"Although surveillance images released last week show only a driver in the Jeep, police said they corroborated Cortes’ account with witnesses and video evidence."

BBM

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/metro/20150905-dallas-woman-23-admits-role-in-uptown-killing.ece

 

[jjenny]

Why would somebody hire this woman to be a driver for a hit man, when it doesn't appear the woman even has a car (she had to borrow it?) Isn't having a car essential to being a get away driver?

 

[DexterMorgan]

It's not clear to me at all that police claim they corroborated the story that there was another person present.

Agree. They only corroborated that the jeep Cherokee was loaned to her by a guy who is not involved. He is the one who came forward and said that's my jeep in the news and I loaned it to Cortez. And that's how cortez got caught. They also agreed with how it happened. But they are still unsure of her telling the truth about this unknown accomplice.

At least that was my take from what I read thus far. So i agree. Speculation is still legal here. Jmo

 

[jjenny]

"Although surveillance images released last week show only a driver in the Jeep, police said they corroborated Cortes’ account with witnesses and video evidence."

BBM

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/metro/20150905-dallas-woman-23-admits-role-in-uptown-killing.ece

So what does that mean? Did they corroborate everything she told them? She claims somebody paid her $500 to drive someone. Did they corroborate that part?

 

[Madeleine74]

Those reports, articles, and warrant(s) are posted right here in this thread.

Ignoring facts released by police and/or verified and published in documents, which does exist in this case, and instead spinning one or more yarns with no basis in reality and which is contrary to what's been published, doesn't seem to accomplish anything other than creating confusion, and yet it happens on this forum even when information showing some of those facts are posted.

 

[DexterMorgan]

"Although surveillance images released last week show only a driver in the Jeep, police said they corroborated Cortes’ account with witnesses and video evidence."

BBM

http://www.dallasnews.com/news/metro/20150905-dallas-woman-23-admits-role-in-uptown-killing.ece

Thanks. Now it's saying the jeep was borrowed by a friend who than loaned Cortes the jeep. It sounds like there is more to this case. But I wonder if they will state something different tomorrow.

 

[Inthedetails]

So what does that mean? Did they corroborate everything she told them? She claims somebody paid her $500 to drive someone. Did they corroborate that part?

Since that sentence is about her being in the Jeep, I am assuming they corroborated the part about her not being alone in the Jeep. JMO.

 

[Inthedetails]

Thanks. Now it's saying the jeep was borrowed by a friend who than loaned Cortes the jeep. It sounds like there is more to this case. But I wonder if they will state something different tomorrow.

The original warrant stated that the owner of the Jeep loaned it to a female who then, in turn, loaned it to Cortes. That has been the story from the beginning as stated in the warrant.

I've seen news reports that got that detail wrong, but it's been in the warrant.

Both the Jeep owner and the female he loaned it to spoke to the police.

Yes, complicated.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Those reports, articles, and warrant(s) are posted right here in this thread.

Ignoring facts released by police and/or verified and published in documents, which does exist in this case, and instead spinning one or more yarns with no basis in reality and which is contrary to available and verified facts doesn't seem to accomplish anything other than creating confusion, and yet it happens on this forum even when information showing some of those facts are posted.

Out of 20 articles. Only 1 has been updated with more information. So you can't fault people for not reading 20 articles on the same murder that just took place the other day. Plus they retract statements all of the time. Yesterday it was said the guy loaned the truck to Cortes. Now today a article says that he loaned it to a female that later on loaned it to Cortez.

Just like the dc mansion murder. They say wint didn't act alone. But then they said. Maybe he did act alone. And its been 4 months.

 

[Inthedetails]

Why would somebody hire this woman to be a driver for a hit man, when it doesn't appear the woman even has a car (she had to borrow it?) Isn't having a car essential to being a get away driver?

I'm thinking that a getaway driver would much prefer a borrowed car. Doesn't it make sense not to use your own car?

 

[wendybtn]

So what does that mean? Did they corroborate everything she told them? She claims somebody paid her $500 to drive someone. Did they corroborate that part?

Eyewitnesses are notoriously wrong. Video evidence would be fantastic. But maybe they are holding back for multiple reasons. LE can do that.

 

[tlcya]

:seeya: Hey, folks, please remember to include links to sources when you reference statements from MSM.

As a reminder, you can copy and paste about 10% of a published article. Likewise, you can post a screencap of an article as long as it doesn't exceed the 10% limit. In either case, you must include a link.

Thanks.

ETA: If you're "sleuthing" friends on SM, that's your business. But DO NOT bring it here.

a reminder - Bolded for emphasis.

If you are attaching a screen cap from an article or from a warrant or charging document provide a link to that document.

 

[DexterMorgan]

Does the warrant state how she was introduced or connected to this man. Did her friend loan her the jeep to give this particular man a ride. Or did her friend just let her use the jeep without wanting to go with her.

I'm just trying to understand why it's so complicated to say she was with an ......male, age..to....And he goes by the name........And they met via........

They just seem to vague about it being a male shooter. It sounds like a Craigslist hit.

I will pay $500 for a 1hr drive. Jmo

 

[katydid23]

Any idea on what the motive is?

I am wondering if KH's new boyfriend was connected to CC in the past?