Compassionate Reader
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2010
- Messages
- 2,357
- Reaction score
- 113
TH didn't start out to kill his step son. If he had, he had guns; he would have used one of those and then "lost" it. IMO, he flew into a rage at Stevie, either for disobeying him when he called him home from the Clark's backyard where he saw the three boys playing and called to them or for soiling his pants which he found at home when he returned after playing guitars with David Jacoby. It could have happened this way: TH gets home, finds the soiled jeans and goes to find Stevie. When he leaves his house, he sees the boys playing in the Clark's backyard. He calls to them, but they run the other way, either out of defiance or fear or maybe because Stevie was planning to run away from home and had made plans to that end with his two friends at school that day. TH follows and finds the boys in the manhole, their secret hideout. From there, IMO, he meant to discipline Stevie, and it got out of hand. When he realized he had killed Stevie, he killed the other two boys because they were witnesses. Then, he goes back to Jacoby, saying he couldn't find the boys, and enlists his aid in searching. According to Jacoby's deposition in the Pasdar case, all of the searching he did with TH prior to Pam arriving home from work was done from the car. TH left Amanda with the Jacoby's when he searched alone or with David. There was ample time for him to check out the boys' condition during the time period while Pam was still at work and before the other parents began searching. Once the heat died down in the woods, he went to the manhole with Stevie's jeans because Pam had told the police that Stevie was wearing jeans when he disappeared, but TH had seen him in shorts and felt the need to "fix" this discrepancy. When he was unable to get the jeans on the dead body, he simply removed the clothes from all victims so as not to call attention to Stevie. He then hog tied the bodies like he had learned while working in a slaughter house and transported them to the discovery site. During the early searching, it seems that TH deliberately chose to search in the area where the manhole was, the BB woods, being sure that no one else went there. He moved the bodies to the discovery site in the RHH woods in the wee hours of May 6th, explaining his absence by saying that he had been searching for the boys all night. That's one possible scenario. There are probably others that differ slightly, but until someone can propose a scenario that explains all the known evidence better than this one, this is what I believe happened. As to the WMPD having additional evidence, the discovery laws require that they reveal all evidence to the defense. Therefore, if the police department has something else, I'm very sure that Riordan and the other defense attorneys are prepared to refute it. There is just no way that three teenaged boys committed this crime without leaving any evidence, and any physical evidence the police had would have been brought out at the original trial. Instead, the prosecution relied on the inaccurate statement of a mentally-challenged youth who has since recanted and has professed his innocence since February of 1994, an occult "expert" will a diploma-mill degree, a jailhouse snitch whose drug counselor told the defense that he (the counselor) told the snitch the story the snitch told the police, statements made by some silly girls about a conversation that they supposedly overheard but of which they were not actually a part, fibers that could have come from any of hundreds of garments at Wal-mart and a knife, found a month later, which experts now say had nothing to do with the murder and which could not be linked physically to the crime at the time.
