LA - Mickey Shunick, 21, Lafayette 19 May 2012 - #31

fairest of them all · Jun 28, 2012

I still think she was mugged by someone on foot. Moo

fairest of them all · Jun 28, 2012

Perp could have parked. Moo

waiting1979 · Jun 28, 2012

dejavoodoo64 said:
That would imply that she just sat there and was run over like a monster truck crushes cars. I don't mean to put that image in anyones head, but that seems what it would be like to me and the easiest was to explain it. And IMO if happened slowly there would be blood on the asphalt.

It's an ugly scenario, but IMO that's the impression I get. I can think of no explanation to be biking at 20-24 mph, as fast as you can, run a red light through an intersection, just to come to what looks like a stop. Except that she knew the throaty gurgling truck that was pursuing her with lights off was behind her again. There is a DWTiq in my vicinity. I can pick that motor sound out of 5 other truck sounds, not to mention cars, and at a distance too, like 10s of feet, maybe 50ft away.. It sounds like a Plymouth Grand Fury III trying to be eco-friendly. My guess is that she knew she was in trouble and didn't want to continue to less populated areas ahead on St.Landry...and the truck came right up on her back wheel, or passed her, and threw it in reverse. I'm leaning away from accident, but this particular Silverado doesn't seem like the best Silverado to take for a pre-planned crime. And the interior is so immaculate.. I dunno. I see contradictions.

clkwrks · Jun 28, 2012

waiting1979 said:
when we don't know how many seconds apart these two frames are. Early on ppl were willing to put them 5 to 8 minutes apart. They appear to be a lot closer than that, especially with LE's description of the truck being 'turning onto St.Landry, right behind Mickey'. What I'm hearing on WS is that other municipal cameras in the vicinity of the Consolidated Government building take pictures every 1 minute, or 60 seconds. If the later is true, there is no way to calculate any physics at all. No speed, no sense of direction. We don't know if it took a right or a left to get onto Landry. Too many X factors, namely time,direction, and rate of speed. You don't have that, you got nothing. I think LE would have shared with us Mickey's progress down St.Landry if she indeed made any. They would want us to know the last time she was seen IMO. This is the last place she was positively seen.

waiting1979 said:
LE also said the 'Mickey went through a red light'.
Several threads ago some WSleuths were working on an angle that had z71 following Mickey on Versailles > St.John with their headlights off. I think the Wsleuth had a point about the middle horizontal line of the grille reflecting light as another vehicle is about to turn left onto ST.John.

Mickey appears to be riding standing up, full tilt boogie.

Someone that knows the area could see the red light a distance down St.John, like at about West Convent, and make a decision to take a right onto West Convent or a left on Hamilton Place to avoid the light. Taking a right or a left to get on Landry from University requires what rate of speed? I'd say about 10 MPH tops. IMO this is a nudge, not a hit. It is not possible to do a turn like this at 20+ MPH without risking of loss of control of the vehicle, and I'd expect screeching tires, skid marks. I don't think we have those marks. If the camera stills are 30 to 60 seconds apart, we are really missing the action. A left onto St.Landry would allow a higher speed, with a wider turning radius.

BBM
Please provide links to these quotes. I can't recall LE stating the the truck was "right" behind Mickey. And I can't find any MSM articles where LE says Mickey ran a red light.
Thanks

med · Jun 28, 2012

dejavoodoo64 said:
Its early here and only on my first cup of coffee, but I would think if she was hit the whole area would have been taped off as a crime scene.Someone would have noticed that. JMO

snipped by me
That is an excellent point!

waiting1979 · Jun 28, 2012

[Originally Posted by dejavoodoo64 View Post
Its early here and only on my first cup of coffee, but I would think if she was hit the whole area would have been taped off as a crime scene.Someone would have noticed that. JMO]

I would tend to agree, but it seems like they got to this event as many as 5 days after the fact, and about 3 days after a rain fall. The truck obscures the potential witnesses at the gas station. It's hard to believe anything this aggressive could go down without witnesses. I've been talked out of believing it, but I end up back here for lack of anything else to go on. Mickey was travelling at about 20-24 MPH, or 0.4 miles a minute. That would have her waayyy down ST. Landry in just a few minutes. No images have arrived. I got the impression that LE were looking at a different route at first, and may have lost time/images due to recycling of security cam storage space.

**edit** I don't think they used caution tape where they found the bike evidence.

waiting1979 · Jun 28, 2012

clkwrks said:
BBM
Please provide links to these quotes. I can't recall LE stating the the truck was "right" behind Mickey. And I can't find any MSM articles where LE says Mickey ran a red light.
Thanks

Fair enough. I will try. I spent about 2 hours looking for CF's daylight pic yesterday and I started at thread 10 I think..
It was early on like May29th-ish, and I found myself wondering when I started just camping out here at WS. I def didn't see some of the early stuff.

clkwrks · Jun 28, 2012

waiting1979 said:
Fair enough. I will try. I spent about 2 hours looking for CF's daylight pic yesterday and I started at thread 10 I think..
It was early on like May29th-ish, and I found myself wondering when I started just camping out here at WS. I def didn't see some of the early stuff.

Thanks. I did find this "One truck that turned on St. Landry street directly behind MS is a Chevrolet white Z71 four-door." from the May 29th [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=7981447&postcount=78"]press conference transcript.[/ame] That's close enough to what you're stating.
I'd still like to see whatever can be found concerning Mickey running the red light though.

kgeaux · Jun 28, 2012

HouDat said:
I still haven't seen anyone explain how she was supposedly hit and neither she nor her bike moved forward. (and, in fact, some are now suggesting she moved backward)

More importantly, this is a still frame from a video -- which would clearly show any such accident occurring in this location.

Sorry, I'm sure I come off a bit frustrated, and it's directed at no one in particular. I just think we (collectively) are better served trying to explore other options to explain what happened to MS, and (hopefully) to find her, rather than engage in this terminal loop of science-bucking and otherwise illogical thinking.

I also think the whole scenario involving Mickey being hit by a truck right there by the Circle K to be illogical and frankly, a waste of time. That area was populated, people were standing outside mere feet from that truck, and there is no way they would have failed to hear an accident OR the bike being loaded into the truck, etc.

And I find it ridiculous to believe that LE would have released a still showing the bike under the truck. Believe it or not, LE around here just isn't that stupid. Neither is FBI.

The overlays of the stills earlier in the thread of Mickey with the DWT overtaking her fails to take into account that Mickey would have moved forward by the time the truck reached the curb area.

waiting1979 said:
I was reviewing threads starting with thread 10, and saw that LE stated that z71 'turned onto St.Landry, right behind Mickey'. if that is the case, then it's a hook sort of movement to calculate your physics..which is still next to impossible without enough frames to show speed. He did not say if the turn was rt of lft.
There is good stuff back there. Thinking about a sweating to the oldies comp. I'll post CF's daylight pic when I find it.

I do not remember any statement by LE that the Z71 turned onto the road "right behind Mickey". Do you have a link for that?

cityslick · Jun 28, 2012

Here's what I think.

I think if she was hit and the video captured that, LE would of told the family this fact. I think LE would of told the media this fact. I'd love to hear explanations as to why they would not tell the family that she was indeed hit and it was captured on video.

Second, and it was just brought up above, that corner would of been deemed a crime scene, there would of been more investigation of the ground (tire marks, blood, etc) at that corner and the media certainly would of caught on to that and reported it.

You can blow up pictures on here, put nice red circles around pixels and all that, but LE, plus whatever other agency is involved with this investigation have tons better investigative techniques on how to view pictures and video and if they made a sound determination that either the bike, human being or the tooth fairy was under that truck, they would of made some sort of comment on that, if not to the media than to the very least the family. I don't say this because I'm trying to shoot theories down. But you follow enough missing persons cases, especially on this forum, you pick up on patterns. Patterns by LE, patterns how the investigation seems to be going, etc.

There is nothing under the truck. I know some want there to be, because it's gives an answer to what happened to her. It also puts a potential perp on camera. But that is not the case here. And until either LE/FBI or someone can provide a photo or video that clearly shows an object under the truck rather than some blown out pixels, I will continue to believe there is nothing there.

De2385 · Jun 28, 2012

Mahouston69 said:
The video at the LCG building is not continuous video. Watch the LCG traffic cameras. See how the vehicle/road shots are taken every few seconds? It's not like watching a home video camera. We don't know the shot increments. So, Mickey and the Truck might only appear once (entering the shot from the left) or twice (another shot where we see her) on the video, or only once. Otherwise we would have a Hooptie shot right there, instead of another camera. The camera increments are spaced at length obviously and have not recorded everthing.

I think the truck photos are cropped in because the video/photo expert is bothered by those odd images by the tire too, thinks the same as we do and zoomed in to tweak it and identify it... and can't. That is why they released it, because they figure if they can't say it is 100% neither can we. You can only enhance pixelated video so much. They had great difficulty identifying Mickey, and her family only identified her by her stance and her hair color, basically. Again, I challenge you to take a screen shot of a LCG traffic cam pic online, then import it into a photo editing program. Can you see any clearer? I can't.

Now, I said I was getting off here.. but I can't. We have a missing girl in Sacramento.

Sacramento girl has curly blonde hair, and petite frame. Where's the FBI?

waiting1979 · Jun 28, 2012

clkwrks said:
Thanks. I did find this "One truck that turned on St. Landry street directly behind MS is a Chevrolet white Z71 four-door." from the May 29th press conference transcript. That's close enough to what you're stating.
I'd still like to see whatever can be found concerning Mickey running the red light though.

Bingo.

re: running red light, if LE didn't say it in the transcript, I'm going to give credit to 'Waldalo', thread#9. The idea that DWTiq pursued Mickey with 'lights off' and the corresponding image is his as well, i think.

De2385 · Jun 28, 2012

chicken fried said:
I am in full agreement. I, too, believe she made it past St. Landry. Without baiting, but still wanting to add a little info here, I have heard from two sources, whom I consider credible, that Mickey made it farther down St. Landry. What makes the sources stronger, IMO, is that one source was based upon a video sighting, and one source based upon a possible personal sighting..... so, two different types of sighting. I believe that ACI also believes she made it father down, though I don't recall the nature of his sourcing.

LE has been notified of both, some time back.

I believe she made it further down. No one would have attempted to grab her there, too much traffic and activity.

De2385 · Jun 28, 2012

fairest of them all said:
[yay! Somebody to talk to....I still think her bike is under the truck.....if someone walked off with her cell phone or wallet I could imagine her chasing after them.....IMO it is completely possible she could have chased them in the opposite direction that she was traveling if that is the direction in which the person went ALL MY OWN SPECULATION BY THE WAY....I KNOW WE HAVE TO SAY THAT EVERY COUPLE OF SENTANCES....anyway.....my theory would account fir a lot....
Lots of people see the bike light under truck.....some people see her but I do not so I agree she's not under there but I cannot help but agree with the people about the bike cuz I see that.....or what I THINK looks like that.moo
If she dropped her bike to chase someone she wouldn't scream....no screams heard
no belongings left behind less attention being paid to wt here lately....IMO they have it figured out or at least the just of it because they turned away outside help ALL MY OWN SPECULATION.....perp on foot went back and picked up pieces and bike after it was run over by truck........before truck circled back to see what he hit......
Are they the same truck?...
Even if they aren't the same truck, the one that IMO. I'm only speculating ran over the bike he might not have known what he hit...
Le seems IMO to have made it quite very crystal clear they only wanted to speak with the driver as a possible witness (to what is NOT shown in pictures) IMO if they thought that white truck was the perp or felt strongly that was their perp they would have given every single detail about the truck and IMO made more effort to find the truck through registration records and etc.......all my own speculation.

Any avid cyclist would not drop their bike in the road to chase someone. They'd use their bike to chase someone.

JBean · Jun 28, 2012

I think the notion that she was hit by that truck in that spot in front of that camera is a gigantic red herring and makes no sense at all. I see nothing to support since the entire incident would have been on video and not a mystery at all. LE would know without question she was seriously injured and the truck would have damage and this investigation would be entirely different.

JMHO of course.

saralsim · Jun 28, 2012

I love reading these argumentative posts that do everything short of blatantly calling someone an idiot and clearly stating their opinion is completely stupid and irrational, but then follow it up with an IMO or whatever. IMO - that stands for IN MY OPINION, doesn't it? I haven't seen anything that says BOTAF (based on the actual facts), which to me means everyone's theory is just that, their opinion. I read lots of things on here that I don't necessarily agree with. It would be exhausting to reply to every statement over and over that I didn't think made sense. It's okay to take a break sometimes. No one has enough information to disprove anyone's theory. To each his own

. IMO, JMO, NBOAF (not based on ANY facts).

Boudin · Jun 28, 2012

waiting1979 said:
when we don't know how many seconds apart these two frames are. Early on ppl were willing to put them 5 to 8 minutes apart. They appear to be a lot closer than that, especially with LE's description of the truck being 'turning onto St.Landry, right behind Mickey'. What I'm hearing on WS is that other municipal cameras in the vicinity of the Consolidated Government building take pictures every 1 minute, or 60 seconds. If the later is true, there is no way to calculate any physics at all. No speed, no sense of direction. We don't know if it took a right or a left to get onto Landry. Too many X factors, namely time,direction, and rate of speed. You don't have that, you got nothing. I think LE would have shared with us Mickey's progress down St.Landry if she indeed made any. They would want us to know the last time she was seen IMO. This is the last place she was positively seen.

That may just be local lingo. St Landry starts at University so anyone entering the road there would be 'turning onto St Landry."

De2385 · Jun 28, 2012

clkwrks said:
Thanks. I did find this "One truck that turned on St. Landry street directly behind MS is a Chevrolet white Z71 four-door." from the May 29th press conference transcript. That's close enough to what you're stating.
I'd still like to see whatever can be found concerning Mickey running the red light though.

Even though it's dark and late I do not believe she ran the red light. The truck might have, but I do not believe she did.

It was also mentioned that there's a belief that she knew the truck was behind her with it's lights off and she knew because it is loud. If that were the case, she would have turned in to Circle K.

However, all of the photos clearly show the truck has it's lights on. If riding with them off was working so well for them, why would they suddenly turn them on?

JBean · Jun 28, 2012

PSA

What everyone does offboard is certainly your business! But we do not support or promote anyone calling any business or case player as any kind of representative of Websleuths and then posting about it. If you make contact with someone that is your business but do not post about it on the board or encourage others to contact anyone.

HouDat · Jun 28, 2012

paddleallday said:
Ok. If a bicycle is hit fom behind by a vehicle, more than likely the rider goes backwards over the vehicle, or on the hood/windshield the roll off on side closest to impact. However, loose items (glasses, purse, etc) are usually found closest to sight of impact.

Check this out:
http://www.collisionsafety.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Bike-crash-trajectory-SAE-900368.pdf

"In our particular set of tests, the cyclist was carried onto the hood of the car and struck the lower portion of the windshield - at or below the midpoint of the windshield - at velocities between 15-20 mph (24-32 km/h). Where the cyclist was astride the cycle as if he were standing and only one foot was on the pedals, the center of the impact damage to the windshield was at or below the base of the windshield itself.
At velocities between 20-25 mph (3240 km/h), the center of the impact area seen on the windshield is found at and above the vertical center of the windshield. For impacts above that velocity, the center of the impact area is found more toward the top of the windshield and onto the roof at the leading edge of the roof line."

This is terrific stuff, and it makes perfect sense. Thank you for the link.

Think of a rug being pulled out from under one's feet (from the front...in a forward direction). Base (feet, etc.) moves forward (in the direction rug is being pulled); upper body falls backward.

Net effect is that the person standing on the rug would pretty much fall in place...but not backward to any significant degree.

Now try replacing that rug scenario with the notion that a forward-moving rider would be thrown backward (by several feet, relative to their initial starting position) by a forward-moving vehicle hitting the rider from behind. It just cannot happen.

I can see how the truck would undercut the rider. We see this all the time in football, when a wide receiver has his legs cut out from under him...legs go in the direction of the force (tackler), torso in the opposite direction. And the net effect is that the WR does not move backward.

That being said: it is impossible for MS to be under that sign in this scenario. (That she was sitting still in the first photo, hit by the DWTIQ, and thrown backward by 8+ feet, in the direction of the object of force (DWTIQ) which hit her.

LA - Mickey Shunick, 21, Lafayette 19 May 2012 - #31

Member

Member

New Member

Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Member

Active Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

New Member

Retired WS Administrator

Well-Known Member

New Member

New Member

Retired WS Administrator

Prominent Member

DNASolves

Online statistics

Forum statistics