1045 users online (214 members and 831 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 136
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Johns Creek
    Posts
    1,613

    Colborn and Lenk... a couple of questions for experts

    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    Personally I think the mishandling of the scene has more to do with the crime rate in that area and less to do with LE involvement. I just don't think they have enough experience with murder scenes. Its easy to say now what should've, could've, would've been done, but Hindsight is always 20/20. It's just very hard for me to believe in a full blown LE cover up conspiracy. It would involve way too many and the more involved, the more likely in 10years someone would've slipped. It's the same with people discussing the lack of THs DNA on her key. DNA is not just everywhere and it's hard to find, we don't just shed DNA on everything we touch. DNA is great when found on evidence but unfortunately it's not easy to find, hence how many crimes go unsolved.
    They did slip - Sgt Colborn had no viable explanation as to why he called in TH's license plate before the car was found. As far no DNA on the key, I don't buy that SA's DNA was on it but TH's DNA was not found - the person that probably used the key almost every day.
    Last edited by shadowraiths; 02-01-2016 at 06:10 PM. Reason: corrected name misspelling

    DEFENDANT IS A LIAR + DEFENDANT'S KID GOES MISSING + DEFENDANT REPORTS KID MISSING AFTER 31 DAYS + KID IS FOUND DEAD = DEFENDANT KILLED KID

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Dark Side
    Posts
    7,491
    Quote Originally Posted by ElleElle View Post
    When I watch testimony, and they, themselves are confused, raises red flags for me.

    Stg Colburn? WTH. Calling in plates? You were not in front in them? Come on. That is just silly. The body language (and I've watched without music); is compelling. Colburn is a liar and nothing will change my opinion of that. I know there are both sides, but that's all I need to see/hear.

    So, if he states he called in the plates on 11/03/05; where was the warrant?

    The Avery property is the last known location of the RAV4? Correct?
    "One man's logic is another man's crazy" - Rossi (Criminal Minds)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,308
    Quote Originally Posted by ElleElle View Post
    So, if he states he called in the plates on 11/03/05; where was the warrant?

    The Avery property is the last known location of the RAV4? Correct?
    If this officer is who is accused of planting the evidence and framing SA. Why would he make that call? He would know it's being recorded and he would already be very aware of who's license plate that was. Why would he need to verify that license plate in order to frame SA?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,354
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    If this officer is who is accused of planting the evidence and framing SA. Why would he make that call? He would know it's being recorded and he would already be very aware of who's license plate that was. Why would he need to verify that license plate in order to frame SA?
    To make sure it's the missing woman's vehicle he's looking at, before taking any further action? Just a guess.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Johns Creek
    Posts
    1,613
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    If this officer is who is accused of planting the evidence and framing SA. Why would he make that call? He would know it's being recorded and he would already be very aware of who's license plate that was. Why would he need to verify that license plate in order to frame SA?
    IMO, he would only make that call if he was sitting behind the car looking at the plates b/c at that time TH was still considered missing. How could that be unless either (1) the car was not on the Avery property at the time of the call and someone found the car, or (2) he was illegally on the Avery property looking at the vehicle. If (2) is the case, who removed the license plates and why was no DNA/blood found on the plate if it was SA, especially with a open cut on his right middle finger ?

    DEFENDANT IS A LIAR + DEFENDANT'S KID GOES MISSING + DEFENDANT REPORTS KID MISSING AFTER 31 DAYS + KID IS FOUND DEAD = DEFENDANT KILLED KID

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Dark Side
    Posts
    7,491
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    If this officer is who is accused of planting the evidence and framing SA. Why would he make that call? He would know it's being recorded and he would already be very aware of who's license plate that was. Why would he need to verify that license plate in order to frame SA?
    Simple. All crooks make mistakes. JMO
    "One man's logic is another man's crazy" - Rossi (Criminal Minds)

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,946
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    If this officer is who is accused of planting the evidence and framing SA. Why would he make that call? He would know it's being recorded and he would already be very aware of who's license plate that was. Why would he need to verify that license plate in order to frame SA?
    He called from his personal cell phone, not the police radio. Did he know it would be recorded? The same guy that said he didn't write a report until 8 months later because "he didn't know he had to do that"

    Why would he make that call???? Even he didn't have an answer in court LOL

    Too bad the defense couldn't subpoena his cell records, they would have been able to narrow down the time maybe.
    Or if it wasn't under suspicious circumstances, and was something routine, and he called it in when he was on duty, maybe while investigating the case (double checking his info or something), just hand over the records and say seeeeeeeeeeeeeee!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Dark Side
    Posts
    7,491
    Quote Originally Posted by Tawny View Post
    To make sure it's the missing woman's vehicle he's looking at, before taking any further action? Just a guess.
    That would imply normal procedure. I have never, ever heard of plates being called in unless near them. *sorry rant*
    "One man's logic is another man's crazy" - Rossi (Criminal Minds)

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,354
    If Colborn's reason for calling in the plates is totally innocent (like, say, he wrote down the number earlier and was calling to confirm), then why could he NOT remember even the DAY he called it in? Why did he have no explanation for that call, aside from a shoulder shrug and "Iunno" as an answer?

    Honestly, had he had a solid answer to that question, I'd be like "aight" and not give it another thought. He couldn't remember ONE phone call in the "most important case in Wisconsin history"? It's been said here in these forums they don't investigate murders all the time, so why couldn't he remember??

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Dark Side
    Posts
    7,491
    Quote Originally Posted by missy1974 View Post
    He called from his personal cell phone, not the police radio. Did he know it would be recorded? The same guy that said he didn't write a report until 8 months later because "he didn't know he had to do that"

    Why would he make that call???? Even he didn't have an answer in court LOL

    Too bad the defense couldn't subpoena his cell records, they would have been able to narrow down the time maybe.
    Or if it wasn't under suspicious circumstances, and was something routine, and he called it in when he was on duty, maybe while investigating the case (double checking his info or something), just hand over the records and say seeeeeeeeeeeeeee!
    It's not about guilt or innocence; it's about the way this case was handled.
    "One man's logic is another man's crazy" - Rossi (Criminal Minds)


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    The Dark Side
    Posts
    7,491
    Quote Originally Posted by Tawny View Post
    If Colborn's reason for calling in the plates is totally innocent (like, say, he wrote down the number earlier and was calling to confirm), then why could he NOT remember even the DAY he called it in? Why did he have no explanation for that call, aside from a shoulder shrug and "Iunno" as an answer?

    Honestly, had he had a solid answer to that question, I'd be like "aight" and not give it another thought. He couldn't remember ONE phone call in the "most important case in Wisconsin history"? It's been said here in these forums they don't investigate murders all the time, so why couldn't he remember??
    Bingo! He is swallowing hard when the call was re-played. He knows he has one chance to prove his "call in to Lynne". lol my name too.
    Who subpoenaed those records? Was it Strang?
    "One man's logic is another man's crazy" - Rossi (Criminal Minds)

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    5,354
    Quote Originally Posted by ElleElle View Post
    Bingo! He is swallowing hard when the call was re-played. He knows he has one chance to prove his "call in to Lynne". lol my name too.
    Who subpoenaed those records? Was it Strang?
    He didn't even bother to come up with a lie! He just shrugged. Unreal.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,946
    Quote Originally Posted by ElleElle View Post
    Bingo! He is swallowing hard when the call was re-played. He knows he has one chance to prove his "call in to Lynne". lol my name too.
    Who subpoenaed those records? Was it Strang?
    My guess is.... they were looking for calls into dispatch for those days, looking for clues, and probably part of discovery. Maybe someone calling in an accident... anything out of the ordinary that happened the days before she was found. I recall reading that it was "track 3 on the CD"

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,308

    Colborn and the License Plate Number

    Colborn named a detective that had called him prior to the plate call in, was this detective called to testify? I would think the defense would want to hear from him involving this plate call in.
    Why would whoever planted the vehicle remove the plates? I would think they would want the plates there for easy determination of who's car it was.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    SK, Canada
    Posts
    3,946
    Quote Originally Posted by Amber29 View Post
    Colborn named a detective that had called him prior to the plate call in, was this detective called to testify? I would think the defense would want to hear from him involving this plate call in.
    Why would whoever planted the vehicle remove the plates? I would think they would want the plates there for easy determination of who's car it was.

    Well... unless you called in those plates and figure it would be less suspicious if the plates weren't on the vehicle. I do think it is very possible that Colborn stumbled upon her vehicle while doing a search.... one that wasn't legal, called it in, realized the mistake he just made and took the plates off so if he was found out, he could say, pfft I didn't see it, and it didn't even have the plates on it.

Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. GUILTY FL - Ele Colborn, 76, found murdered, Fernandina Beach, 20 April 2007
    By sherri79 in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 09-28-2015, 02:31 PM
  2. A couple questions...
    By Julessleuther in forum Rose Cole
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-21-2013, 01:09 AM
  3. Questions for Levi Page. NO DISCUSSION QUESTIONS ONLY.
    By grandmaj in forum Kyron Horman
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-20-2010, 10:42 AM

Tags for this Thread