CONVICTION OVERTURNED AK - Kent Leppink, 36, murdered, Hope, 2 May 1996

New Posts

flourish said:
Most respectfully bolded by me, Nancy:)
It sure makes a person wonder, doesn't it? The one person who probably knows as much as Mechele turns up dead...

I, too hope Carlin IV tells what he knows. It's interesting, in the (very poorly written) Fred Rosen book, Carlin IV is quoted as saying that he and Mechele had a falling out when he was staying with her in ~2004. Supposedly the falling out was regarding how much money he was getting paid (or not getting paid) for babysitting and housework, etc. He also says that "she stole my dog." Something to do with him having to leave the dog to fly home to New Jersey...I don't know if they had previously arranged something different and it got changed due to their argument or what the deal was with that. It would be interesting to hear more.
Click to expand...

ooh! I got so annoyed by the Rosen book I feel like my mind glazed over and I totally missed those interesting details!!! I didn't know any of that. Very interesting!
I hope he testifies about everything he knows, with no agenda. Who knows, maybe he doesn't really know anything else. But I'm sure he does. It's strange so many people on ADN like to suggest HE is the mystery shooter and Carlin was covering for him. I guess that's possible, but I don't see any evidence for that. I've always viewed him sympathetically, so I can't see it anyway. He used to post sometimes on the ADN boards (handle = something like scarlito), as did his girlfriend (mandy -something). I wish they would return and offer more insight.
 
The discussion board on the Free Mechele FB site indicates there's some trouble with the current third-party custodian arrangement.

"Mechele's attorneys requested a rewriting of her third-party custodian requirements because as they are written, her third- party is basically under house arrest and cannot conduct her own life, despite the agreement to be with Mechele 24/7 and the $250,000 bail bond, both of which are to better ensure she shows up for her trial, and the judge saying he did not consider her a flight risk.

The third party was not considered at all, treated as an appendage after being willing to help make the system work. Mechele had more freedom to move around outside of her house when she was in Washington.

Currently, both Mechele and her third-party may never sleep at her third-party's home and have an 8:00 PM curfew every night of the week. During the day, except for Mechele's legal and medical appointments, both women must be either in Mechele's apartment or at her third-party's home every day all day except for two four-hour passes a week. That means her third-party can never spend nights with her husband, will see him very little M-F, cannot take care of her own necessities of life, or even take her dog for a walk any time none of Mechele's other third-parties can be in Alaska.

The law does not allow for putting third-parties under house arrest, and it is not reasonable or even humane to expect a third-party to cease existing for the most part for up to a year.

The third-party has agreed to be tied at the hip with Mechele 24/7, but has requested the ability to have them sleep at either residence (which Mechele could do in Washington), and to let them move about town as long as they are always together.

First Prosecutor Pat Gullufsen refused any accommodations, followed by Judge Volland's refusal. The Judge's refusal is confusing given his thoughtful and reasoned explanations as to why Mechele is less of a flight risk than before, she is in Anchorage instead of Washington State, she paid bail, authorities have her third-party's address and phone number for contact at any time, and Mechele proved herself reliable last time while out of the state. It is confusing why this time the requirements are so much more stringent, even when there is only one third-party in the state during periods. It is confusing enough that the third-party is beginning to wonder if
she is now a target of vindictiveness at least on the part of the prosecutor."

hmmm!:waitasec:

sorry, can't help it:
PADILLA.jpg
 
Wow, Nancy, thanks for that info! Very interesting indeed! So...
1) Who picks the 3rd parties? I mean, everyone involved knew where everyone lived before this agreement was made, right?
2) Was everyone aware that these were going to be the circumstances of the release before they agreed to this? If so, did they object/protest or mention this as a problem beforehand? Are they bound to it as part of the whole release agreement? Is it even really negotiable?
 
flourish said:
Wow, Nancy, thanks for that info! Very interesting indeed! So...
1) Who picks the 3rd parties? I mean, everyone involved knew where everyone lived before this agreement was made, right?
2) Was everyone aware that these were going to be the circumstances of the release before they agreed to this? If so, did they object/protest or mention this as a problem beforehand? Are they bound to it as part of the whole release agreement? Is it even really negotiable?
Click to expand...

I don't know that much about the third-party custodian thing. It's not something that happens in my state. Interestingly, 33 states afford for third-party custodians as a condition of pretrial release, but Alaska uses it substantially more often than any other state-- perhaps because of geography?? and its visual proximity to Russia ??
palin-dancing-snl.gif

(sorry, I couldn't control myself)

I read something about this phenomenon somewhere-- can't remember exactly where. But in AK, well over half of the individuals on pretrial release have to have a third-party custodian in addition to monetary bail-- and in some jurisdictions 80-90% have to have a third-party custodian, so it's not weird in Alaska. (I'm pulling an all-nighter and have consumed a pot of coffee ps so this threatens to be ambling & verbose :)

I think this Free Mechele FB missive seems like more of an objection to the home confinement requirement than an objection to the custodial terms. IDK-- but yes it's weird to be taking issue with the requirements now. I think this seems like a case of someone being unwilling/unable to accept that rules apply to them.:snooty:

So to address your points/answer your questions-- those were the things I thought when I read the post too-- my thoughts:

1) Mechele had to find her own third parties and then the court had to approve them. Technically she could have just one-- and I'm assuming she could have several more than 3. Probably a good idea since 2/3 live FAR away. And the the judge had to intensely screen the custodians, their living situations, criminal histories, etc. before they could be approved.

2) And yes, per statute, the judge has to inform the custodians of all conditions and duties "personally and in writing" because if the custodian violates those terms they may be criminally liable for the violation (in addition to the bond being revoked and/or forfeited). So everyone knew what was expected before Mechele was released. And everyone agreed. Including, and perhaps crucially, the bail bondsman. In agreeing to guarantee Mechele's bond, he likely considered the third-party custodian condition + home confinement as an additional reason to agree to secure Mechele's bail because that combo substantially reduces Mechele's flight risk, thereby securing his investment. (if she flees, he's out $225,000 minus the old strip club/motel offered up as collateral). And the local strip club owner who offered up his property as collateral also likely considered the custodian/house arrest condition in his decision to offer up his property.

So, even though Mechele can move for a hearing to ask Judge Volland to reconsider the conditions of her release and Judge Volland could change them, that doesn't mean the bondsman and strip club owner would agree to keep securing her release.

I think it's understandable the prosecution and Judge Volland refused to change the restrictions-- I think her conditions are fair since she stands to lose nothing personally if she flees, has a history of forging identification/ assuming false names, and is again facing life in prison, etc. Personally I think she needs to find some additional custodians to off-set the burden placed on the one local custodian. What do you think?

Here's the statute that generally governs pretrial release conditions, if anyone is interested :)
 
nancy botwin said:
I don't know that much about the third-party custodian thing. It's not something that happens in my state. Interestingly, 33 states afford for third-party custodians as a condition of pretrial release, but Alaska uses it substantially more often than any other state-- perhaps because of geography?? and its visual proximity to Russia ??
palin-dancing-snl.gif

(sorry, I couldn't control myself)

I read something about this phenomenon somewhere-- can't remember exactly where. But in AK, well over half of the individuals on pretrial release have to have a third-party custodian in addition to monetary bail-- and in some jurisdictions 80-90% have to have a third-party custodian, so it's not weird in Alaska. (I'm pulling an all-nighter and have consumed a pot of coffee ps so this threatens to be ambling & verbose :)

I think this Free Mechele FB missive seems like more of an objection to the home confinement requirement than an objection to the custodial terms. IDK-- but yes it's weird to be taking issue with the requirements now. I think this seems like a case of someone being unwilling/unable to accept that rules apply to them.:snooty:

So to address your points/answer your questions-- those were the things I thought when I read the post too-- my thoughts:

1) Mechele had to find her own third parties and then the court had to approve them. Technically she could have just one-- and I'm assuming she could have several more than 3. Probably a good idea since 2/3 live FAR away. And the the judge had to intensely screen the custodians, their living situations, criminal histories, etc. before they could be approved.

2) And yes, per statute, the judge has to inform the custodians of all conditions and duties "personally and in writing" because if the custodian violates those terms they may be criminally liable for the violation (in addition to the bond being revoked and/or forfeited). So everyone knew what was expected before Mechele was released. And everyone agreed. Including, and perhaps crucially, the bail bondsman. In agreeing to guarantee Mechele's bond, he likely considered the third-party custodian condition + home confinement as an additional reason to agree to secure Mechele's bail because that combo substantially reduces Mechele's flight risk, thereby securing his investment. (if she flees, he's out $225,000 minus the old strip club/motel offered up as collateral). And the local strip club owner who offered up his property as collateral also likely considered the custodian/house arrest condition in his decision to offer up his property.

So, even though Mechele can move for a hearing to ask Judge Volland to reconsider the conditions of her release and Judge Volland could change them, that doesn't mean the bondsman and strip club owner would agree to keep securing her release.

I think it's understandable the prosecution and Judge Volland refused to change the restrictions-- I think her conditions are fair since she stands to lose nothing personally if she flees, has a history of forging identification/ assuming false names, and is again facing life in prison, etc. Personally I think she needs to find some additional custodians to off-set the burden placed on the one local custodian. What do you think?

Here's the statute that generally governs pretrial release conditions, if anyone is interested :)
Click to expand...

OMG that Palin vid is classic hilarious! That woman...sheesh she's dumb.
Anyway, thanks for the further information regarding the third-party thing. I agree that finding one or more additional custodians would be prudent. I guess I'd envisioned something where Mechele would stay in someone's house or her studio would be attached to the custodian's house or something like that.

It is very interesting to think how the bond/bail guy would have input into this...makes sense, I mean, they're on the line here. And you make a great point that Mechele has shown herself to be the kind of person to gather more than one identity (just ask her sister), and, knowing exactly what prison is like now, she's possibly even more likely to run than she was before.

I still can't believe they let a first-degree murder suspect out on bail at all. I can't wait to hear what more comes of this!
 
Hmm...seems that post on Facebook was updated a couple of hours ago and appears the same EXCEPT FOR IT'S MISSING THE LAST LINE NOW. V e r y interesting, no?


nancy botwin said:
The discussion board on the Free Mechele FB site indicates there's some trouble with the current third-party custodian arrangement.

"Mechele's attorneys requested a rewriting of her third-party custodian requirements because as they are written, her third- party is basically under house arrest and cannot conduct her own life, despite the agreement to be with Mechele 24/7 and the $250,000 bail bond, both of which are to better ensure she shows up for her trial, and the judge saying he did not consider her a flight risk.

The third party was not considered at all, treated as an appendage after being willing to help make the system work. Mechele had more freedom to move around outside of her house when she was in Washington.

Currently, both Mechele and her third-party may never sleep at her third-party's home and have an 8:00 PM curfew every night of the week. During the day, except for Mechele's legal and medical appointments, both women must be either in Mechele's apartment or at her third-party's home every day all day except for two four-hour passes a week. That means her third-party can never spend nights with her husband, will see him very little M-F, cannot take care of her own necessities of life, or even take her dog for a walk any time none of Mechele's other third-parties can be in Alaska.

The law does not allow for putting third-parties under house arrest, and it is not reasonable or even humane to expect a third-party to cease existing for the most part for up to a year.

The third-party has agreed to be tied at the hip with Mechele 24/7, but has requested the ability to have them sleep at either residence (which Mechele could do in Washington), and to let them move about town as long as they are always together.

First Prosecutor Pat Gullufsen refused any accommodations, followed by Judge Volland's refusal. The Judge's refusal is confusing given his thoughtful and reasoned explanations as to why Mechele is less of a flight risk than before, she is in Anchorage instead of Washington State, she paid bail, authorities have her third-party's address and phone number for contact at any time, and Mechele proved herself reliable last time while out of the state. It is confusing why this time the requirements are so much more stringent, even when there is only one third-party in the state during periods. It is confusing enough that the third-party is beginning to wonder if
she is now a target of vindictiveness at least on the part of the prosecutor."

hmmm!:waitasec:

sorry, can't help it:
PADILLA.jpg
Click to expand...
 
flourish said:
Hmm...seems that post on Facebook was updated a couple of hours ago and appears the same EXCEPT FOR IT'S MISSING THE LAST LINE NOW. V e r y interesting, no?
Click to expand...

Interesting! So even though it doesn't now explicitly state "the third-party is beginning to wonder if she is now a target of vindictiveness at least on the part of the prosecutor," that's still glaringly obvious within the rest of the diatribe. Personality disorders and the criminal justice system just don't mix well. :snooty:

I noted that sometime between the original posting and whenever the deletion occurred, someone posted comments to the entry saying they should at least be glad Mechele survived prison, given what happened to Carlin. They said something about how precautions should be taken to make sure she is safe now that she's free. The original poster agreed. Then the commenter asked "and may I ask just who you are to Mechele exactly?" --I imagine trying to get the original poster to cop to the fact that she's Mechele Linehan's resident third-party custodian (B. Sheridan), or just out of generalized curiosity. The commenter's posts were swiftly deleted, though she remains in the Free Mechele FB group.

I google searched the deleted commenter's name and found a record indicating she once owned or transferred property to one of Kent Leppink's brothers. Interesting. I imagine the Free Mechele camp could have interpreted her comment as a threat or something. IMO it totally wasn't at all.

Also! Mechele herself has posted on the Free Mechele blog:

"Hello my Dear Friends and Family: I am truly blessed. I am so sorry that it’s taken me almost a week to sign on here. I have been shell shocked. Im going full force today. Set up a facebook account, twitter and email. Its difficult to express my gratitude to all, because words aren’t enough. I know that I wouldn’t be sitting here with my daughter if it weren’t for all of you and your strength. You all worked so hard for my release. I should say rescue. You not only rescued me, physically, but spiritually. I love you all!
I will post a lengthy update this evening

May 19, 2010 5:11 P"

She has indeed set up a twitter account and a facebook account, though she hasn't yet delivered on her promise to write that lengthy update. She has tweeted a few times, though. I hate twitter and would prefer she blog. Hopefully my wishes will come true. :woohoo:

Twitter: http://twitter.com/MecheleLinehan
 
Just posting an update for those who are still interested in following this case-- no big developments in the news lately.

Mechele has, however, blogged three times in the Free Mechele site (the three most recent entries here) and continues to twitter about her leisure activities. Does anyone have an opinion about Mechele's use of social media while out on bond?

Someone has created a fake Mechele account on Facebook (using the name Mechele Hughes Linehan) and has apparently been bombarding the Free Mechele FB site with comments about Mechele's guilt. It's strange. Thanks to Flourish for pointing this out to me! :)

Here's an older blog entry about the case from My Life of Crime-- the comments and their authors are interesting:
some old comments from the man who would ultimately provide Mechele's bail $; comments from a woman who claims Mechele dated her son as a teen; Mechele's sister; a woman who says she danced with "Bobby Jo" at the Bush Co.; a man who says he dated Mechele when she was in her 20's; a woman who says she is friends with Scott Hilke etc.
 
Considering that some prison inmates seem to have internet access to post on dating/pen pal sites...I don't see why she should not be able to use social sites while she is out on bail...
 
I don't think there should be any restrictions on her social networking, and I don't think that is what Nancy was implying (?) I thought she was just asking what we thought about it happening, not whether or not we thought it should be allowed to happen :)

I can see how Mechele would be so excited to be out of there that she'd want to talk about it and communicate and interact with people and the world at large. Since she's still restricted physically, it makes sense that she'd want to get online.

However, and the same goes for Mechele and all the Free Mecheleans, that all this talk about how innocent she is only goes so far. There continues to be nothing new being put out there as far as evidence. Supposedly there's alllll this evidence and what-not that will set us all straight. Well where the he!! is it, then? I can see why Mechele herself wouldn't want to directly discuss her case and maybe she's not even supposed to talk about it. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF THEM???

You can talk and talk and talk about how everyone has their facts wrong until you're blue in the face, but it's not going to be very effective until you actually put that information out there. ALL TALK AND NO WALK is what it sure looks like.

The person who has been posting on the facebook site using Mechele's name is so obviously not her if for no other reason than they MISSPELLED her name (Mechelle instead of Mechele). And, no surprise, their posts were all removed within hours of posting them.

Speaking of the facebook, I saw on the discussion board on the Free Mechele page (http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=55155870302&v=app_2373072738#!/topic.php?uid=55155870302&topic=13554) that one person posted a link to Kent's findagrave site comments. Considering the topic of the discussion is "Does Anyone want to help me with investigational work on the internet?" it makes me wonder if they are "investigating" people who leave comments on Kent's findagrave site...??? I would really hope not, because that is some seriously offensive trolling if that's their plan!

I hope all this makes sense as I am frantically typing away on a break at work.
 
nancy botwin said:
Here's an older blog entry about the case from My Life of Crime-- the comments and their authors are interesting:
some old comments from the man who would ultimately provide Mechele's bail $; comments from a woman who claims Mechele dated her son as a teen; Mechele's sister; a woman who says she danced with "Bobby Jo" at the Bush Co.; a man who says he dated Mechele when she was in her 20's; a woman who says she is friends with Scott Hilke etc.
Click to expand...

Nancy-snipped for emphasis:)

Holy cow, that link has some interesting stuff! Thanks for the linky, Nancy!
 
flourish said:
Nancy-snipped for emphasis:)

Holy cow, that link has some interesting stuff! Thanks for the linky, Nancy!
Click to expand...

Thanks! I thought it was interesting too!
I just typed out a big post responding to your last one, but my browser froze and now I'm too annoyed :snooty: to retype it right now. grrr.


However! If you find the mylifeofcrime comments interesting, there's another interesting chunk of comments on the Eyes for Lies site. I can't directly link to the entry. But it's the March 11 entry with 84 comments.

The gang is all there on that comment section too (it spans multiple pages)-- Scott Hilke comments; Mechele's mom has some interesting comments for Scott Hilke; Mechele's sister comments; Tina Brady from the 48 Hours episode comments; Brian Watt, Mechele's bail benefactor is there; a couple of women who purport to have known Mechele in prison; some people who say they worked with/dated Mechele in the past; MandyK (John Carlin IV's girlfriend); and even the person who started the fake "Mechelle Hughes Linehan" FB account (the top, like, 5 comments are from that person). It's all very interesting!

Also, Mechele's third-party custodian has blogged on the Free Mechele FB site, apparently responding to a comment about how Mechele's former private attorneys will no longer represent her pro bono:

"It is not true that Mechele's previous attorneys refused to represent her this time. Online posts stating it is so are merely made up by person/s who do not know any of the parties involved. (If they Do professionally know the defense attorneys despite not knowing anyone else involved, then shame on them because it means they are hoping to once again manipulate public perception long before her trial in order to convict a second time with only innuendo and drama rather than real evidence.)

Many attorneys want this case because of the notoriety and/or because of what it represents regarding justice and civil rights, but how Mechele chooses her representation is more complicated than who wants the case..."

I don't know what the overarching point of this entry is (or why I'm interested :woohoo:) but I found it noteworthy because it seems to be a bit of a misconstruction of the truth. Mechele's mother had previously blogged about how Mechele's private attorneys would be representing her for free until she was finally acquitted. Mechele's trial attorneys said as much in the 48 Hours/Dateline episodes. And Mechele's mom posted an entry awhile ago when she was upset because those attorneys had apparently reneged on that promise:

"... I am tired of the red tape of legal strings that has bound my child into captivity. I feel bad for attorneys that only care about how much money they make representating this case. What ever happened about just doing it because it is the right thing? Where are the attorneys that took a vow about representing justice? Is is just about the money for you?..."

It makes sense that no attorney could work on this case for years without getting paid. And it also makes sense that Mechele's mother finds that reality upsetting and frustrating. So I don't know what the third party custodian is aiming at in the new FB blog, but I found it interesting.

And thanks for your thoughts on my social media use question! I was just wondering if it resonated in poor taste with anyone else. I have an anti-twitter bias because I think twitter's interface tends to make everyone seem rather narcissistic and annoying ("I'm eating stinky cheese" :hand: and watching DVD box sets, etc.). I do agree with you about Linehan's desire to use the internet to connect with others and think her blog entries seem like a cool way to connect with her supporters/show her human side etc. I just hate the Twitter/ think it could be a poor choice when one is awaiting a retrial on first degree murder, etc.
 
I just hate the Twitter/ think it could be a poor choice when one is awaiting a retrial on first degree murder, etc.
Click to expand...
Respectfully snipped.

One never knows what will come back and bite you in the butt.
 
nancy botwin said:
Also! Mechele herself has posted on the Free Mechele blog:

"Hello my Dear Friends and Family: I am truly blessed. I am so sorry that it’s taken me almost a week to sign on here. I have been shell shocked. Im going full force today. Set up a facebook account, twitter and email. Its difficult to express my gratitude to all, because words aren’t enough. I know that I wouldn’t be sitting here with my daughter if it weren’t for all of you and your strength. You all worked so hard for my release. I should say rescue. You not only rescued me, physically, but spiritually. I love you all!
I will post a lengthy update this evening

May 19, 2010 5:11 P"
Click to expand...

Respectfully snipped

Trying out my terrible 'Statement Analysis' skills, here goes nothing.

Look at the order of things she tells us she does first, this can also be what are the most important things to her:

Set up - Facebook, twitter, Email

Gratitude for herself first then her daughter, nil mention of husband.

Then the talk returns back to herself.

Oh yeah, and she addresses the post to friends (first) family (last).

My bet is that she will quickly drop the 'freemechele' people. I do firmly believe it is still all about Mechele.
 
Hey there everyone...I just want to thank all of you for all of the info and links that you contribute here. I sometimes just sit here and read about this woman's antics and am in awe....almost have to pick my jaw up off the floor!

Nancy, thanks for the info re My Life of Crime....reading those comments were interesting, to say the least! Acquaintances from Mechele's past were certainly left with an indelibile impression of her character! I have read the Eyes for Lies site but not the comments...will spend time today on that....should be interesting.

I'm not surprised that Mechele latched onto social networking/Twitter immediately and I guess she does have that right....but anything and everything she does is blatantly self-serving.

I also want to add that someone was kind enough to point me in the direction of Anchorage Daily News for all of their past coverage and I was astounded at the depth of the information there. I apologize that I can't remember exactly which one of you wonderful sleuthers helped me out on that but thanks so much!

Anyway, just want to say thanks for all of the info all of you contribute here...I don't post often but I read everything and appreciate all of your efforts.
 
I’ve been gobbling up all the commentaries on the sites you recommended and all of it has been fascinating reading. One comment grabbed my attention because I had read about it elsewhere. At the time I wasn’t bookmarking the case and I couldn’t find the reference.

On the 48 Hour website someone noted that Colin and Mechele were found with $700 worth of merchandise in a baby stroller while in a department store. My recollection of the news report is that it occurred in Maryland and Colin’s explanation was that the baby started screaming and he wanted to get the child out of the store quickly, forgetting about the stuff in the carriage. They were not charged. Does anyone have a link to this news story?

Thanks so much for keeping us informed on this tantalizing case.
 
marilhicks said:
I’ve been gobbling up all the commentaries on the sites you recommended and all of it has been fascinating reading. One comment grabbed my attention because I had read about it elsewhere. At the time I wasn’t bookmarking the case and I couldn’t find the reference.

On the 48 Hour website someone noted that Colin and Mechele were found with $700 worth of merchandise in a baby stroller while in a department store. My recollection of the news report is that it occurred in Maryland and Colin’s explanation was that the baby started screaming and he wanted to get the child out of the store quickly, forgetting about the stuff in the carriage. They were not charged. Does anyone have a link to this news story?

Thanks so much for keeping us informed on this tantalizing case.
Click to expand...

Shoot I totally remember reading that within the last couple of weeks. I remember thinking, "Wow, $700 worth of clothes at Nordstroms? Must be nice to be able to afford that!" Anyway, I'll look and see if I can find that when I'm not at work.


On a very snotty note, ever since I read Mechele's blog entry it's been bugging me: She still hasn't resolved her issues with pseudo-homonyms, as she wrote "bazaar" instead of "bizarre" in her entry (I think she even misspelled bazaar, too). Kinda reminded me of her "expected" vs. "accepted" mistakes in her emails from back in the day. Her spelling and grammar has absolutely nothing to do with her guilt or innocent status, I am just being a nerd and had to point it out.

Nancy, I agree that Twitter is simply an abomination in general. Maybe I'm getting too old, but I don't see the point of informing everyone you know about your mundane activities. I don't mean this about Mechele's posts specifically, just that I agree Twitter is lame.

One last thing: earlier, I was listening to a cd in my car and caught a line of a song that totally made me think of Mechele and her men:

Beware of pretty faces that you find
A pretty face can't hide an evil mind.
Be careful what you say
Or you'll give yourself away
Odds are you won't live to see tomorrow.
Click to expand...
--"Secret Agent Man" sung by many people, I don't know who wrote it (Johnny Rivers, maybe?) I was listening to The Ventures.

Hmm...reminds me of Casey Anthony and Karla Homolka, too...that just might have to be my new signature here:)
 
flourish said:
Shoot I totally remember reading that within the last couple of weeks. I remember thinking, "Wow, $700 worth of clothes at Nordstroms? Must be nice to be able to afford that!" Anyway, I'll look and see if I can find that when I'm not at work.


On a very snotty note, ever since I read Mechele's blog entry it's been bugging me: She still hasn't resolved her issues with pseudo-homonyms, as she wrote "bazaar" instead of "bizarre" in her entry (I think she even misspelled bazaar, too). Kinda reminded me of her "expected" vs. "accepted" mistakes in her emails from back in the day. Her spelling and grammar has absolutely nothing to do with her guilt or innocent status, I am just being a nerd and had to point it out.
Click to expand...

Thanks - my reaction to the Nordstrom's story was wonderment that someone could forget $700 worth of purchases in a stroller. (Scratching head.)

I haven't been following her tweets since I find that venue shallow and pointless. But I find it interesting that someone with a master's degree is so lacking in basic skills of spelling, grammar and English expression. It would be hoped that she had developed some skills since those appallingly written emails of 15-16 years ago.
 
Yay! More people are posting on this thread again!! :woohoo: !!

darnudes said:
Respectfully snipped

Trying out my terrible 'Statement Analysis' skills, here goes nothing.

Look at the order of things she tells us she does first, this can also be what are the most important things to her:

Set up - Facebook, twitter, Email

Gratitude for herself first then her daughter, nil mention of husband.

Then the talk returns back to herself.

Oh yeah, and she addresses the post to friends (first) family (last).

My bet is that she will quickly drop the 'freemechele' people. I do firmly believe it is still all about Mechele.
Click to expand...
I agree with your statement analysis! I'm on board.
I also noted her failure to mention her husband. I was always very impressed by him-- his 18 pg sentencing letter, interviews, and blog posts reveal him to be a very articulate and loyal man. Hopefully he just doesn't want to be mentioned in the blog or something? It IS odd though, IMO, since she posts the name of her young daughter online etc.
I also agree it appears to still be 'all about Mechele' and I hope a bunch of people (especially her husband!) aren't left feeling used/disappointed when all is said and done.

I am impressed by the number of steadfast strangers who have rallied to Mechele's side. While I don't necessarily agree with their perspective/position, it is cool to see that a lot of people do care about perceived injustice. There definitely ARE many rather obviously innocent people in prison and they do need support, so it's just curious to me that so many have lobbed onto Mechele vs. more obviously innocent/sympathetic people or causes. $25k from a stranger, etc!

Also, Mechele did post three more entries, which I'll link to in case you didn't get to see them yet:
Blog 1
Blog 2
Blog 3
:woohoo:

Blondie in Spokane said:
Hey there everyone...I just want to thank all of you for all of the info and links that you contribute here. I sometimes just sit here and read about this woman's antics and am in awe....almost have to pick my jaw up off the floor!

Nancy, thanks for the info re My Life of Crime....reading those comments were interesting, to say the least! Acquaintances from Mechele's past were certainly left with an indelibile impression of her character! I have read the Eyes for Lies site but not the comments...will spend time today on that....should be interesting.

I'm not surprised that Mechele latched onto social networking/Twitter immediately and I guess she does have that right....but anything and everything she does is blatantly self-serving.
Click to expand...

Yay! I'm glad you also enjoyed the comments-- I found them so interesting!
I agree about the self-serving internet use. It's a double-edged sword, IMO, though. For example, her most recent tweet:
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss

To me this smacks of a sort of defiant narcissistic obliviousness. I imagine a lot of people might mind that she's lazing about and twittering inanely while a lot of people firmly believe she belongs in prison-- for example Kent Leppink's family probably minds. Potential jurors and the prosecutor might mind. All of those people certainly matter. :waitasec:


marilhicks said:
I’ve been gobbling up all the commentaries on the sites you recommended and all of it has been fascinating reading. One comment grabbed my attention because I had read about it elsewhere. At the time I wasn’t bookmarking the case and I couldn’t find the reference.

On the 48 Hour website someone noted that Colin and Mechele were found with $700 worth of merchandise in a baby stroller while in a department store. My recollection of the news report is that it occurred in Maryland and Colin’s explanation was that the baby started screaming and he wanted to get the child out of the store quickly, forgetting about the stuff in the carriage. They were not charged. Does anyone have a link to this news story?

Thanks so much for keeping us informed on this tantalizing case.
Click to expand...

Yay! I'm glad you're back-- I found the shoplifting info! Initially I thought this was just a rumor, but I see a few sources indicate the shoplifting accusation was brought up at trial. Here's one article. Apparently, the Linehans maintained it was a misunderstanding, the charges were dropped and he wasn't prosecuted. If it wasn't a misunderstanding, I'd definitely put my bet on Mechele being the culprit and not her husband.

flourish said:
...

On a very snotty note, ever since I read Mechele's blog entry it's been bugging me: She still hasn't resolved her issues with pseudo-homonyms, as she wrote "bazaar" instead of "bizarre" in her entry (I think she even misspelled bazaar, too). Kinda reminded me of her "expected" vs. "accepted" mistakes in her emails from back in the day. Her spelling and grammar has absolutely nothing to do with her guilt or innocent status, I am just being a nerd and had to point it out.

Nancy, I agree that Twitter is simply an abomination in general. Maybe I'm getting too old, but I don't see the point of informing everyone you know about your mundane activities. I don't mean this about Mechele's posts specifically, just that I agree Twitter is lame.

One last thing: earlier, I was listening to a cd in my car and caught a line of a song that totally made me think of Mechele and her men:

--"Secret Agent Man" sung by many people, I don't know who wrote it (Johnny Rivers, maybe?) I was listening to The Ventures.

Hmm...reminds me of Casey Anthony and Karla Homolka, too...that just might have to be my new signature here:)
Click to expand...

Oooh interesting! And I'm glad that you also find twitter to be an "abomination in general" haha! Love it. I also noted the grammar/diction struggles that appear to have endured, despite that much-toted Master's Degree. I'd feel badly about being snide, but I'm annoyed by the way this degree is toted in the media and by her supporters-- as if she'd stopped world hunger or become a nun or something.

That reminds me-- I've always been a bit curious about whether it's been alleged that she or the other parties in this case were involved in drug use when the crime occurred. Her emails are painful to read and essentially devoid of punctuation etc. And of course her behavior points to some other sort of serious malfunction... I've always wondered if it was possible she was using a lot of drugs at the time or something? Does anyone know if this has ever been discussed??

Also, an update:
Mechele's mother is apparently visiting Mechele and her daughter in Alaska and has blogged briefly about it:

"Hi to all!!! Arrived in Anchorage last night and I cannot tell you the joy I felt in seeing my child free!! There are no words to describe how wonderful it was to hug her and know she did not have to be put back in a cell! Audrey is drinking in her mother's love and trying to make up for lost moments. Thanks to all of you for helping in making this come about. You support got us here. Mechele and I will both post later...just wanted to share the excitement of FINALLY getting here and being with Mechele and *****.

A very excited mom!!
 
nancy botwin said:
Yay! More people are posting on this thread again!! :woohoo: !!


I agree with your statement analysis! I'm on board.
I also noted her failure to mention her husband. I was always very impressed by him-- his 18 pg sentencing letter, interviews, and blog posts reveal him to be a very articulate and loyal man. Hopefully he just doesn't want to be mentioned in the blog or something? It IS odd though, IMO, since she posts the name of her young daughter online etc.
I also agree it appears to still be 'all about Mechele' and I hope a bunch of people (especially her husband!) aren't left feeling used/disappointed when all is said and done.

I am impressed by the number of steadfast strangers who have rallied to Mechele's side. While I don't necessarily agree with their perspective/position, it is cool to see that a lot of people do care about perceived injustice. There definitely ARE many rather obviously innocent people in prison and they do need support, so it's just curious to me that so many have lobbed onto Mechele vs. more obviously innocent/sympathetic people or causes. $25k from a stranger, etc!

Also, Mechele did post three more entries, which I'll link to in case you didn't get to see them yet:
Blog 1
Blog 2
Blog 3
:woohoo:



Yay! I'm glad you also enjoyed the comments-- I found them so interesting!
I agree about the self-serving internet use. It's a double-edged sword, IMO, though. For example, her most recent tweet:
"Be who you are and say what you feel because those who mind don't matter and those who matter don't mind." -Dr. Seuss

To me this smacks of a sort of defiant narcissistic obliviousness. I imagine a lot of people might mind that she's lazing about and twittering inanely while a lot of people firmly believe she belongs in prison-- for example Kent Leppink's family probably minds. Potential jurors and the prosecutor might mind. All of those people certainly matter. :waitasec:




Yay! I'm glad you're back-- I found the shoplifting info! Initially I thought this was just a rumor, but I see a few sources indicate the shoplifting accusation was brought up at trial. Here's one article. Apparently, the Linehans maintained it was a misunderstanding, the charges were dropped and he wasn't prosecuted. If it wasn't a misunderstanding, I'd definitely put my bet on Mechele being the culprit and not her husband.



Oooh interesting! And I'm glad that you also find twitter to be an "abomination in general" haha! Love it. I also noted the grammar/diction struggles that appear to have endured, despite that much-toted Master's Degree. I'd feel badly about being snide, but I'm annoyed by the way this degree is toted in the media and by her supporters-- as if she'd stopped world hunger or become a nun or something.

That reminds me-- I've always been a bit curious about whether it's been alleged that she or the other parties in this case were involved in drug use when the crime occurred. Her emails are painful to read and essentially devoid of punctuation etc. And of course her behavior points to some other sort of serious malfunction... I've always wondered if it was possible she was using a lot of drugs at the time or something? Does anyone know if this has ever been discussed??

Also, an update:
Mechele's mother is apparently visiting Mechele and her daughter in Alaska and has blogged briefly about it:

"Hi to all!!! Arrived in Anchorage last night and I cannot tell you the joy I felt in seeing my child free!! There are no words to describe how wonderful it was to hug her and know she did not have to be put back in a cell! Audrey is drinking in her mother's love and trying to make up for lost moments. Thanks to all of you for helping in making this come about. You support got us here. Mechele and I will both post later...just wanted to share the excitement of FINALLY getting here and being with Mechele and *****.

A very excited mom!!
Click to expand...

I really do not mean to sound or be mean but what her mother has quoted makes me want to puke! Just the way Mechele has treated her mother in the past is disgusting. It seems to me that Mechele's mother is living in a state of denial of the sick behavior of her own daughter. YUCK!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 236 more.
Total: 4,097 (members: 237, guests: 3,860)

Online statistics

Members online
237
Guests online
3,860
Total visitors
4,097
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,548
Messages
17,954,669
Members
228,531
Latest member
OwlEyes
Back
Top