Brianna Denison 19yo Reno NV #8

Status
Not open for further replies.
The RGJ is really starting to make me mad....
http://news.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080306/NEWS01/80306031/0/NEWS18&theme=DENISON
Police said two women and two men lived at the MacKay Court home. Authorities would not disclose which woman, K.T. Hunter or Jessica Deal, owned the underwear. But investigators said the woman identified the underwear and said it was hers.

I thought Jessica was not a resident of the house? Seriously, why aren't these facts straight after nearly two months?

Also, in the same article:

Investigators do not know how the suspect obtained the student’s underwear and said they had no evidence that any of the roommates’ rooms had been burglarized.

And about the panties and Bri's body:

Struffert said Thursday the pink and black panties were found intertwined with Denison’s body.

So, to answer someone else's previous questions, the panties are not necessarily intertwined together, but possible mixed in with Bri's body in some way...

I caution you to refer back to the official LE statement. The media has a tendency to get a little sloppy with the wording.
 
How did this guy find the laundry room, even know one was there? Why would he risk spending extra time in this house? And if he did, how did the other girls not hear him? If this guy was walking around trying to find underwear, wouldn't you hear it, a creak in the floor or something, versus him taking two steps to come in the door to the couch and back out with Brianna in his arms?

I feel like this second pair of underwear is more baffling than the first.

A bomb could go off next to my college age daughter and she'd never hear it. She doesn't hear the alarm clock, the phone.....nothing. I'm sorry, but after a night of partying and such, I don't hear creaks or anything either. If I go to bed late and have had a drink or two - someone could walk around my house, pick up underwear, kick the cat, steal my husband's body from the bed beside me and I wouldn't necessarily wake up. What about all the weirdos who get caught and have 1,000's of pairs of stolen women's underwear. If this house was notorious for having left the doors unlocked - he could have been around the house as a peeping tom before and gotten in and gotten panties. I don't think stealing a pair of panties would be all that hard. But that's only my opinion. If no one woke up to him taking a live woman from the house, I don't think sticking a pair of undies in his pocket would wake up anybody.
 
The perp did leave dna at the abduction scene. It may or may not be fingerprints. I don't think it's been reported where the dna was left. I'm also not sure if it was verified that the DNA was an "oily substance". Does anyone here know or remember if that is fact?

No, you didn't miss anything. :) As I said, the DNA thing is only one of many theory's running through my head.

When the info about the pp underwear was 1st released, some people thought it was left at the scene by accident. With the new info, don't most of us agree that's not the case? That lends much creedence to the theory that the perp is "playing games".
The mention that the DNA could be an oily substance such as from the fingers was brought up by a member of RPD during an interview either on Greta or NG (I heard it, but haven't read it yet..it should be in those archives tho.) It was in the beginning of the invest and they were asking him about the DNA they claimed to have. His responsed that he couldn't tell them specifically, BUT...then went into what it could be with some enticing by one of the anchors.
 
I caution you to refer back to the official LE statement. The media has a tendency to get a little sloppy with the wording.
I tend to agree with you on this one. No mention by LE that they were intertwined WITH the body. However, if one cared to speculate...you would have to consider such since the DNA was not transfered from one pair to the other. It would make logical sense in this case. He could have bound her with one pair and strangled her with another leaving them on her which would be considered entwined with her body in some manner.

Struffert said the pink underwear was found at the scene intertwined with a pair of distinctive black women’s underwear ~snip~
http://www.cityofreno.com/index.aspx?recordid=1334&page=1421
 
I tend to agree with you on this one. No mention by LE that they were intertwined WITH the body. However, if one cared to speculate...you would have to consider such since the DNA was not transfered from one pair to the other. It would make logical sense in this case. He could have bound her with one pair and strangled her with another leaving them on her which would be considered entwined with her body in some manner.

Struffert said the pink underwear was found at the scene intertwined with a pair of distinctive black women’s underwear ~snip~
http://www.cityofreno.com/index.aspx?recordid=1334&page=1421

I agree that he could have bound her but I have to look at his behavior. From what we know, he has not tied up his other victims has he? His previous behavior makes me doubt that he planned, before the attack, to kill Brianna.

I don't disagree with you but I don't see evidence of it either, even considering that his behavior has escalted by the home invasion.
 
Dad~ Since we don't know the condition or the pose of the body, it is impossible to imagine the role either pair played. Since we don't have another victim murdered by him (that is known), we have no base to draw from on what he would or would not do before or after he killed. His rage could have gone far beyond strangulation into ravaging the body and leaving her in a state which was meant to outrage and shock LE. In that scenario, to bind her or gag her would not be out of the question even if he had not done it to his rape victims prior to this murder.
 
Dad~ Since we don't know the condition or the pose of the body, it is impossible to imagine the role either pair played. Since we don't have another victim murdered by him (that is known), we have no base to draw from on what he would or would not do before or after he killed. His rage could have gone far beyond strangulation into ravaging the body and leaving her in a state which was meant to outrage and shock LE. In that scenario, to bind her or gag her would not be out of the question even if he had not done it to his rape victims prior to this murder.

True, but what we do have is known previous attacks. The behavior in those attacks does not support any speculation much beyond what is known about the death of Brianna.

He could have done a million things and we can spend imaginative energy devising those actions but it should have a reasonable basis. My opinion is that unbridled speculation takes us further from the facts and the truth.
 
True, but what we do have is known previous attacks. The behavior in those attacks does not support any speculation much beyond what is known about the death of Brianna.

He could have done a million things and we can spend imaginative energy devising those actions but it should have a reasonable basis. My opinion is that unbridled speculation takes us further from the facts and the truth.
Or could very well bring us closer to the truth. There are two sides to your unbridled speculation coin. Let's flip for it.

Again, apples and oranges. You cannot base what he did to Brianna on what he did to previous rape victims as he did not kill them. This puts Brianna's case into a new category. His past behavior only relates up to her being abducted. From that point on...we have nothing to draw from for any kind of comparison in crimes.
 
Or could very well bring us closer to the truth. There are two sides to your unbridled speculation coin. Let's flip for it.

Again, apples and oranges. You cannot base what he did to Brianna on what he did to previous rape victims as he did not kill them. This puts Brianna's case into a new category. His past behavior only relates up to her being abducted. From that point on...we have nothing to draw from for any kind of comparison in crimes.

Well that gives some insight to your reasoning style. My style is just different.

Nope, same apple that is turning a darker shade.

Your statements highlighted above sure makes speculation without accountability easy. Based on that, I am disappointed in the speculation creativity.
 
The mention that the DNA could be an oily substance such as from the fingers was brought up by a member of RPD during an interview either on Greta or NG (I heard it, but haven't read it yet..it should be in those archives tho.) It was in the beginning of the invest and they were asking him about the DNA they claimed to have. His responsed that he couldn't tell them specifically, BUT...then went into what it could be with some enticing by one of the anchors.

Thanks SS,
I wasn't sure if it was something said by media or by LE, etc. But it sounds like it "could" be fingerprints. Thanks again for the response.
 
Well that gives some insight to your reasoning style. My style is just different.

Nope, same apple that is turning a darker shade.

Your statements highlighted above sure makes speculation without accountability easy. Based on that, I am disappointed in the speculation creativity.
I told you before I think outside the box. I don't get locked into the trappings LE does with their approach to cases. I think you have to look at all possibilities then rule them out one by one and they look at one possibility based solely on facts as they see them then the minute they realize they are missing the critical piece to the puzzle that will take them down the correct path...they have a cold case on their hands because they haven't considered other possibilities. Most of the time, they refuse to start over and find the right piece so instead they put it in their backburner file and depend on some retired LE officers to gander over it in their spare time to find it.
 
I told you before I think outside the box. I don't get locked into the trappings LE does with their approach to cases. I think you have to look at all possibilities then rule them out one by one and they look at one possibility based solely on facts as they see them then the minute they realize they are missing the critical piece to the puzzle that will take them down the correct path...they have a cold case on their hands because they haven't considered other possibilities. Most of the time, they refuse to start over and find the right piece so instead they put it in their backburner file and depend on some retired LE officer to gander over it in their spare time to find it.

Yes, you did warn me didn't you.
 
I have just always had the feeling from the beginning that one or more of the people in the house that night, knew more than they were saying.

Maybe they don't want to believe it, or they only met the person once or twice in casual meetings from the male roomates.....I just feel someone in the house might have a clue or suspicion on the person who might have done it.

I followed the facebook group for Bri, and I don't recall seeing any messages from Kt or jessica. We haven't heard anything else from them either. Does anyone know if they attended the memorial for Bri after she was found?

I think when all is said and done there will be a logical explanation. There's a house with two male and two female roommates and people coming and going on a daily basis. So it's very possible the the suspect is somehow acquainted with one of the four people who lived at the MacKay Court house. The suspect may have been at that house once or twice as a friend of a friend of one of the house residents. He may well be someone they've forgotten about......just a guy who tagged along with one of their friends. The suspect may have been in that house long enough to have a good idea of the layout and the fact that it's left unlocked.

The suspect could have picked up the pink underwear long before Bianna's abduction. If the suspect visited there and used the bathroom, he could have taken the underwear from the laundry hamper. The owner of the underwear my not have noted them missing at the time, but immediately recognized them when the police showed them to her.

There's a lot of possible scenarios....................
 
Your input is greatly appreciated, Dad. You have to allow others to follow their instincts and use their own methods to arrive at their own theories, decisions, and thoughts. We don't have to think alike to arrive the same place. :)
 
I think when all is said and done there will be a logical explanation. There's a house with two male and two female roommates and people coming and going on a daily basis. So it's very possible the the suspect is somehow acquainted with one of the four people who lived at the MacKay Court house. The suspect may have been at that house once or twice as a friend of a friend of one of the house residents. He may well be someone they've forgotten about......just a guy who tagged along with one of their friends. The suspect may have been in that house long enough to have a good idea of the layout and the fact that it's left unlocked.

The suspect could have picked up the pink underwear long before Bianna's abduction. If the suspect visited there and used the bathroom, he could have taken the underwear from the laundry hamper. The owner of the underwear my not have noted them missing at the time, but immediately recognized them when the police showed them to her.

There's a lot of possible scenarios....................
I wouldn't even be surprised to find he was a one night stand either from one of the girls or one of their friends.
 
Are you always this exasperating or is it just with me?! Your input is greatly appreciated, Dad. You have to allow others to follow their instincts and use their own methods to arrive at their own theories, decisions, and thoughts. We don't have to think alike to arrive the same place. :)

You know the saying, friends don't let friends . . . :crazy:

Actually, I had hoped to find, on this site, logic and reason in discussing factual evidence and engage in thoughtful and reasonable speculation. That just seems to be sparse much of the time and replaced with thoughts so far from it, the box is invisible.
 
:laugh: :laugh:
You know the saying, friends don't let friends . . . :crazy:
:rolleyes:

Truthfully, can you go to another site and find what you have here? We do try to find every piece of what is released to the public, keep track of such and compartmentalize them into fact, speculation, possibilities, etc. We keep things in perspective while at the same time try to find the missing links. If you can find another site which isn't full of people who continually go off topic or let nonsense get in the way...I haven't seen it and I have looked. I respect the people here and their opinions. I like the way we banter pros and cons. We have intelligent, articulate, and devoted sleuths who enjoy getting to the bottom of a case...with what we have to work with.
 
Hi everyone- Interesting discussion, although I have to admit I never thought I'd read 7 pages of discussion about dirty underwear! :eek:

It sounds like most of you have been following this case for awhile. If you don't mind I have a couple of questions. Has there been any information about where Brianna was killed? It sounds like it wasn't where her body was found?? Also, I haven't read anything about LE saying the killer's behavior is worse than we know. Was that a public statement by LE or just something someone heard?

I'm not going to question KT's credibility until there is reason to. If she did minimize the partying that evening I totally understand. People are always quick to judge the victim, especially in sexual crimes, and this may have played a part in her response. I can't even imagine how terrified (and ticked) I'd be to know that psycho had been in my house, on the other side of the door to the room I was sleeping in. Add to this he kidnapped and did who knows what terrible things to your good friend before taking her life. A million and one "what if's" have to go through that girl's mind every day. I doubt if I'd still be able to form a sentence, let alone think clearly about what I had done the night before my life changed forever. I hope we can all show some empathy for those friends of Brianna's. If you think you want this nutcase found can you imagine how they feel?
 
I believe he could have found the panties randomly that night at MacKay Court, but the problem I'm having is him taking all this time and possibly making commotion to do this.

I do not believe that the panties would have been left out in the open in the common area. Girls in general can be slobs, but most draw the line at leaving their undergarments lying around where other people - especially men - can see them.

How did this guy find the laundry room, even know one was there? Why would he risk spending extra time in this house? And if he did, how did the other girls not hear him? If this guy was walking around trying to find underwear, wouldn't you hear it, a creak in the floor or something, versus him taking two steps to come in the door to the couch and back out with Brianna in his arms?

I feel like this second pair of underwear is more baffling than the first.

We know the girls went out that night. Part of going out is taking a shower and a change of clothes. It's possible that a laundry basket/hamper or a pile of dirty clothes was within sight.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
91
Guests online
1,313
Total visitors
1,404

Forum statistics

Threads
589,168
Messages
17,915,102
Members
227,745
Latest member
branditau.wareham72@gmail
Back
Top