In a Fayetteville Observer article Detective Locklear gives a timeframe but he doesn't specify what each individual time represents.
He says whatever happened between ______ and ________.
We still don't know which text was sent at what time. He says the time of 1:24 a.m. was the last time her phone was activated.
From searching all threads, police haven't officially verified the exact words or any text specific messages but they refer to Kelli's text messages as being important to the investigation.
Any time assigning to specific text messages is speculation on our part.
Police have not released the words to any of the text messages.
It seems to me that, from the beginning, we went with the 1:10-1:20 a.m. timeframe that NH claims to have left the bar and dropped Kelli off near her apt.
Detectives must have taken NH's word for it (why would they?) because every article states 'Kelli was last seen by NH a rso at 1:20 a.m.'
on April 14. I can't remember there being a dispute about the stated time being wrong.
During pressers that's the info they put out. Then LE asked the public to report anything observed around midnight.
LE never said why or that the last know time anyone besides NH saw Kelli was _______.
It seems (have to locate the article) that LE has gathered important information from patrons that were in FB that night.
But also the Det. thinks due to the tone of Kelli's text messages, they shed light on what she was feeling about who she was with
or something like that.
How does the 'got home safely' text do that? It doesn't. There has to be texts that they think Kelli did send.
If she was frightened or not taken straight home and had access to her phone then why wouldn't she text something specific if she could
like 'help'? If the 'call me ASAP' text is true, it doesn't sound as if she thought she was in imminent danger.
They need to have evidence and be prepared with answers when the evidence is attacked. I don't think a defense lawyer (especially one who's just in it to win) needs WS to come up with ideas. But the Prosecution has the burden of proof.
If the 'call me ASAP' text is true (no official confirmation or MSM article), I can't reconcile that message with how Kelli new something bad was going to happen. 'Kelli it's me? What's up?' Kelli, 'NH is trying to rape me!' Or, 'I'm being driven away from my apartment.'
What's the caller supposed to do? Kelli's message should be 'call 911 on Ramsey St.' or 'help me now at FB', etc.
Call me ASAP seems like she needs to tell J (or whoever) that she spots someone she didn't expect to see. Then, bam, they get her.
Too bad she wasn't more specific. One can hope that she was I guess.
kelli died in the bar due to alcohol or other... and signs of bruises or scratches in consequence of the aggression...
if kelli had died in the bar, and everyone present had organized the concealment of the corpse, do not believe that nh had done some agreement with the police, to avoid prison, telling the truth? death was accidental! and he is the only person to be blamed for the disappearance.
if nick killed kelli, certainly was not premeditated murder. No one is stupid enough to kill a person that everyone knows to be in his company. if he does not have any bruises or scratches, I'm sorry to say, but it is a point in his boon.
if mb killed kelli was certainly premeditated. driving for 7-9 hours round trip through three states. the signal from the phone. no one knew was coming. (I repeat: if it was him! this is just a theory. I do not blame anyone) in this case, he might getting away without any scratch or bruise. all armories sell the electroshock weapon (for example). premeditation. no scratches or bruises.
I really have no idea what happened. may have been both, or neither...
the witnesses have said that nh has been gone for 10 minutes (to accompany kelli at home), but how long he remained at the bar, after returning? and how his state of mind? nervous, scared, clear?
If nh is the murderess, he certainly hid the body after that all went away, after the bar closed. 10 minutes, or 20, or 45 ... are relative! for this I am convinced that the body be placed in the north, in some way street that intersects ramsey street... (If nh is the murderess)
(sorry if there are grammatical errors, but I'm not american and my english is not very good)
Regarding the second question, I have no idea what days she had gone to FB.
On the third bold, to answer the question, I don't know but I would like to know. I would hope LE knows one way or the other.
I don't think VOH is "not allowed" to talk about the case, VOH has declined to give out information that he feels is not his business to give out and/or that he believes is part of LE's investigation that has not been made public.
I have some perspective on VOH's side: I wasn't a case insider like VOH, but I sort of became one in a case I followed in my area that got resolved last year. I had come to be friends with several of the witnesses in the 2 years before the trial and eventually got to know the victim's family. I learned some facts about the case early in the trial that either weren't public at the time (or were never made public).
I chose to keep a very clear boundary. For the longest time I only knew what the public knew. It wasn't that I didn't care or wasn't curious about the case (I totally was), but I made it a point not to ask questions or talk about the case when I socialized with them because I assumed they couldn't answer and I didn't want to put anyone in an awkward situation. Plus, adding to anyone's pain was not something I ever wanted to do. I figured I'd learn the details when the case got litigated. I had to be patient. Yes, it was hard. Plus, most of them knew or learned I was a member of WS, and that could have been very awkward (to say the least). Respecting people's privacy is one of my core beliefs, so I kept my mouth shut and kept my WS life and real life separate. It's not something I discussed with them, it's just what I felt was the right thing to do and it's how I'd want to be treated if I were ever in that painful situation, so that's how I conducted myself. It's something I'm really glad I did.
Sooo to bring it back to VOH and the KB case...I do get where VOH is coming from. As a non-insider and bystander I of course want to know everything and wish VOH would tell more of what he knows. But I do understand the dilemma.
Debate is healthy. Let freedom ring!
If I knew the truth and LE asked me not to talk to the media or others about it, I would probably not shout it out. The important thing to me is if they're shouting it out to LE, not to me here, as much as I may wish they would. Regarding how it could hinder the investigation, I would guess that LE's position would be that the more the perp is in the dark as to what LE knows, the better. Also, by keeping certain facts quiet, if the perp slips up and mentions it he has no explanation for knowing that fact. LE loses that advantage if information is released. Keeping it quiet also allows them to weed out tips. Lets say LE knew for a fact that NH left at 1:00 and someone calls in and says that they saw NH driving with Kelli at 12:00, they would know that that tip is not credible. Whereas if they had released that information that tipster may have changed the time to 1:00 to fit what LE released. Just some thoughts off the top of my head AND I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR BEFORE IT GETS TURNED INTO A RUMOR AND THEN MORPHED INTO FACT...THE TIMES ARE PURELY HYPOTHETICAL TO TRY TO ANSWER A QUESTION. The caps are just attention grabbing, not yelling. Just my thoughts to your questions posed.
The lawyers have one decided advantage over WS case followers (well, more than 1 actually): They know what all the evidence is and they get all (or most) of the discovery.
By the time a defense attorney is brought in and after an arrest on a charge, the defendant's attorney gets to see everything the state has against their client. The state, of course, already has seen all the evidence.
When they poke holes they know exactly what the troublesome areas are, what are the weak spots of the opponent's case, and what they've got to prove their side of the case.
Debate is healthy. Let freedom ring!
To be fair though, while people knew NH was Kelli's ride home on that Fri night, Kelli wasn't expected anywhere in particular on Sat or Sun. She wasn't reported missing until Monday (afternoon). The perp could have thought (or assumed) that no one would notice Kelli missing until a few days had passed. The last text sent from Kelli's phone appears to be an attempt to take attention away from the Fri night timeframe. Afterall, if she "got home safely" and went missing after that, it would have nothing to do with who she was with on Fri night.
Debate is healthy. Let freedom ring!
the kidnapper or kidnappers, the murderess or killers could know kelli had no commitments for that weekend, but they couldn't know that she would have been completely ignored for two days.
"Couldn't agree more and that is what I think Websleuths is so good at doing. Alot of what lawyers do in preparing for trial is what we do here on Websleuths. They put a theory of the case together and then try to poke holes in it, looking for the weak points, places they need evidence to shore up the case. Much like we do here when discussing different theories. So yes, I think WS would be a lawyer's dream. "
Sorry I didn't intend to suggest otherwise. For example, with the recent CO shootings- his medical information shouldn't have been released. I haven't followed up on that detail in particular, but in the beginning I heard some chatter about his lawyer spinning that in his favor.
Meanwhile.... I see posted on the news thread for Kelli
With self-awareness comes the realization that none of this makes sense
Three-No Cases (click to blog)]
Rule-of-Three (click to blog)
Red Flags When Spouse Goes Missing (click to blog)
Bumping for Kelli...
It's so quiet here all of the sudden :/
Being relatively new here, I have really come to be frustrated with the lack of detail on things that are even reported on. I don't know whether to read the most recent article to mean LE made a second trip to Florida or if they are referring to the original trip. I would be interested to know if this is a second trip that was made. Is it a matter of LE keeping things close to the vest or MSM not thinking to ask the follow up questions?
News articles can often be confusing or vague. Most articles have the name of the person who wrote it listed underneath. Best way to get clarity is to email the writer directly and ask them your question. Many will write back and answer and some will even update their original article to make the context more clear. Worth a shot!
Debate is healthy. Let freedom ring!
And just so everyone knows, I do not feel anyone is attacking me. I can understand everyone's frustration because I feel it too. I know we all have the same cause here - to find Kelli and see justice embraced. I pray that one day we will.