LA - Mickey Shunick, 21, Lafayette, 19 May 2012 - #15

HouDat · May 31, 2012

Some observations based on posts from the previous thread:

1) Dee Stanley, LCG CAO, is a former newsman and, thus, skilled in all things media-related. I can surmise that he was dispatched to the scene in case official commentary was needed, in the absence of Redflex Joey;

2) Great video of the swift current at the river. As I've mentioned in a couple of prior posts, speed of current/water volume (cf/s) is largely dependent upon up-river conditions. I am inclined to believe that at the time that video was taken, there were flood conditions up north. IIRC the date of that video coincides with the locks at the Morganza Spillway having been opened last year for relief of flood conditions up-river...which would mean that Whiskey River (Bay) was also moving quite swiftly. All that to say what someone else has already said: if a body were dumped in the river (especially in haste, i.e. without any sort of weighting devices), and the river was moving as swiftly as yet another poster has suggested it has been, as of late, then that body would be far, far downstream.

slowlybutshelly · May 31, 2012

Thank you. I think the issue of time for our involved truck is critical; but we do know he was VERY CLOSE IN TIME TO MICKEY AND MUST HAVE SEEN HER because the same cars are in the gas station parking lot in both MS pic and the trucks pic. I wonder if LE has any additional evidence of a time frame overlap with these two pics. I included the third pic in previous posts (with the man with odd gait) because the same two cars in the MS,truck of interest photos were in the gas station at this time too. That is why I think it so odd the police ruled out one truck; it had the image of the same vehicles in the gas station and almost same time as other two pics. Just seems odd.

shefner · May 31, 2012

wodalo said:
i have a question regarding the hand-grips being found... if it has been cleared up, i could not find where...

were they found on the bike or separated (cut off)?

if they were cut off, it should be easy to tell if they were cut with a pocket knife or a utility blade based on pressure applied (based on the markings left on the handles)...

the reason i ask is many people do not carry a utility knife in their vehicles aside from painters, construction workers, etc...

if cut with a pocket knife, we might be able to assume that the bike was loaded up and grips were cut in-route or under the bridge...

if a utility knife was used, that might imply that they were cut off at a residence/business implying a stop may have been made somewhere in between... or at least be a clue as to perps profession.

i know it is thin... but these little details might mean something to someone whereas they might mean nothing to someone else...

thx...

There was much discussion about the handle bar grips, since LE specifically mentioned them. But they would not give details about them...so we don't know much.

CCK · May 31, 2012

wfgodot said:
Also germane to the discussion: the family have hired a private investigator, perhaps an indication that they are unhappy with current progress (or lack of it).

I thought this as well when I saw the news on it. I wondered why they would hire a PI at this time. Are they not happy with the police work on the case?? Is Equusearch still on the case as well?

A.C.I · May 31, 2012

concernedformickey said:
Did you go sleuthing around again on Brashear?

Did anything stand out to you in that neighborhood?

Do you picture it happened in that neighborhood potentially or that she made it to Johnston?

I've been up and down that area repeatedly. And theres nothing that is grabbing my attention. I think she may have made it to Johnston, or like I said before she turned into the parking lot of 215 ST Landry to move over and let a vehicle pass...and it turned in right with her. She's be trapped in there and the camera only faces the street....thus seeing nothing that went on right next to it

concernedformickey · May 31, 2012

PinkiGreen said:
Because that's what they do. I find it amazing that people think LE releases all info and evidence. The family does not decide what is or is not released. :banghead:

What I continued to be intrigued by is what the allowed amount of actual lying is allowed.

For example, they claim there is no additional footage of Mickey. And then A.C.I. says there is continuous footage somewhere down on St. Landry. So would they lie or can we then conclude that she did divert her path right there or was hit right there somewhere.

It's clear they withold info. But how much outright lying would they do. If they can just lie for undisclosed reasons, I feel like a lot of us are wasting our time trying to even do any brainwork based on the tiny bits of info released.

slowlybutshelly · May 31, 2012

No I am talking about the 'spec' of black on the rt side toward the entrance to the gas station; is it a person or is it something else? It appears in the picture with our truck of interest also, but not in the picture with MS.

tezi · May 31, 2012

PinkiGreen said:
Because that's what they do. I find it amazing that people think LE releases all info and evidence. The family does not decide what is or is not released. :banghead:

Hitting the "thanks" button was not enough. I feel just like this:banghead::banghead: too. I don't understand why that is so hard to comprehend.

JMO, IMO, :moo:, and all other disclaimers....

bessie · May 31, 2012

:seeya: Let's stay on topic, folks.

A.C.I · May 31, 2012

audie said:
And 215 st landry is where the olds was caught on surv vid, not too far down. Correct?

I'm just now getting why y'all were suggesting places where she turned off.

It took me a good while to figure out where that surv vid of the olds was from and now Im wondering why I didn't figure out right then that the bike and truck didn't show up.

I'm gettin too old I guess.

Thats correct. It is a real time camera and both her and the truck should be on video if they passed it.

nutkin · May 31, 2012

I think whether or not LE are decent is hit and miss. I wouldn't trust my local PD to retrieve a kitten from a tree. Their idea of investigating the idiots that shot at my boyfriend in our front yard is to call every few weeks or so asking him if he knows their names. There are gunshots in my neighborhood every.single.night. I'll bet there are at least 5 people selling crack at the car wash right down the street (and not discretely, at that).

There are some LE in the general area who are amazing, however. It just depends.

And any LE agency that releases lots of evidence, especially right away, is very suspect to me. How can you ever really arrest the person responsible if everyone knows the facts of the crime? You'd have every Joe Blow who wants their name in the paper confessing! (Yes, it happens.) And contrary to popular belief, most crimes are not solved by DNA. It is solid police work or a confession and potentially later on, followed up by DNA.

Years and years later, you might get more specific details about a crime.

shefner · May 31, 2012

Concerning Locard's Principle, I wouldn't be surprised if LE has some tire tracks from down in the area where Mickey's bike was recovered....tire tracks. Not sure...but their statement that they do not think the bike was dropped from the bridge said to me that they have some evidence of a vehicle down below.

amysmom · May 31, 2012

A post by Chicken Fried from the last thread:

[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7988379&postcount=772"]Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community - View Single Post - LA LA - Mickey Shunick, 21, Lafayette; 19 May 2012 - #14[/ame]

I'm still slightly confused about the Whiskey Bay bridge vs the Basin bridge even after seeing the included pix..It looks to me like the exit ramp is on the Basin bridge & not the Whiskey Bay but no matter cos what's really imp to me are these 2 things.

Is State Route 975 where we see all the LE vehicles parked & the media standing? Where the perp also had been to dump the bike if it wasn't thrown from the bridge? I assume so since it's the only road I can see in the entire area.

To the right of what's very obviously a body of water (Whiskey Bay Pilot Channel) is more water very close to the road..Is this where they were searching for that so-called possible "evidence" last night? Is this where the bike was found submerged in water? To the left looks too far away & where is the access to it? I admit I stink at these visuals so I may be way off base..Btw! If I wasn't told that was water I'd still be thinking it wasn't cos of the funky color of it & the look of the area in general..I hope this is making some sense to someone else?

Isabelle · May 31, 2012

OT: Slaughter, La: 5 people in one car killed this am when hit head on by a man driving a truck. The man in the truck was intoxicated! Looking forward to knowing how many DUI's this man has!

HouDat · May 31, 2012

A.C.I said:
The only two pictures with timestamps are on univetsity. LE told us the pics of Mickey were at 1:47 and 1:48. You have to piece together the rest. Tons and tons of old posts and threads on the order

Perhaps I'm focusing on minutiae, perhaps not, but: has LE taken into consideration the variance between timestamps? (IE the clocks on the two cameras/recorders not being perfectly synched -- to each other and/or to Atomic Clock time?)

Foxfire · May 31, 2012

wfgodot said:
Thanks, I can never remember the name of that principle - always good to have it so one can toss it in the conversation and seem frighteningly learned: "Yes, I see; however, Locard's exchange principle states simply that, with each incidence of contact, the perpetrator...." etc. etc. I must memorize that name. And it's such a simple yet wonderful concept.

Locard's exchange principle and Edmond Locard (Wiki)

I think we all know the principle, just not who stated it. On my favs now.

justwannahelp · May 31, 2012

if the z71 truck is innocent then why doesnt he just come forward? all he has to say is "i was on that route at that time and this is what i saw... " or "i didnt see anything" depending if he did or didnt see anything.

the fact that hes not coming forward makes him suspicious.

HouDat · May 31, 2012

bonbonbelle said:
Seems like it took a lot of people an awfully long time to verify that it was a wooden log out there. :waitasec:

The log initially refused to answer questions without an attorney present. :banghead:

A.C.I · May 31, 2012

concernedformickey said:
What I continued to be intrigued by is what the allowed amount of actual lying is allowed.

For example, they claim there is no additional footage of Mickey. And then A.C.I. says there is continuous footage somewhere down on St. Landry. So would they lie or can we then conclude that she did divert her path right there or was hit right there somewhere.

It's clear they withold info. But how much outright lying would they do. If they can just lie for undisclosed reasons, I feel like a lot of us are wasting our time trying to even do any brainwork based on the tiny bits of info released.

Thats the annoying thing about working with LE. You just never really know. I can't say for sure they didnt cross the camera until I see the video myself. In the meantime we have to assume she didnt based on that LE said so

oddball62983 · May 31, 2012

Isabelle said:
OT: Slaughter, La: 5 people in one car killed this am when hit head on by a man driving a truck. The man in the truck was intoxicated! Looking forward to knowing how many DUI's this man has!

according to my news station this will be his second. he walked away with minor injuries.

LA - Mickey Shunick, 21, Lafayette, 19 May 2012 - #15

Prominent Member

TAKE BACK THE NIGHT

Member Since 2008

New Member

Private Investigator

New Member

TAKE BACK THE NIGHT

Proud member of WS since 2000.

Verified Insider

Private Investigator

Well-Known Member

Member Since 2008

Well-Known Member

Verified registered nurse

Prominent Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Prominent Member

Private Investigator

Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics