Hannah Graham: Body Recovered, 18 Oct, 2014 **Awaiting Forensic Confirmation** #2

[jabberwocky]

This area/property doesn't seem remote enough for that, and it doesn't seem permanently abandoned.

Your comment made me think of the super creepy underwear house somebody found in a rt 66 New Mexico ghost town. There is a thread in the parking lot somewhere, but I can't find it anymore. That thread kept me up at night; I've never been so creeped out after reading something before.

I remember that! Very odd.....here's the thread:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?218309-disturbing-display-I-found-in-vacated-house

 

[jamicat]

I doubt if he harmed them. JMO but from everything I've read, the majority of serial killers have a victim "type."

In JLM's case it was, apparently, young women in a vulnerable state due to one reason or another.

Then again, there are documented cases of serial killers who just want to kill anyone, no type or even preferred gender required.

But I don't think JLM was one of these.

All JMO.

I agree. I also think JMO is very impulsive and immediate,driven by urges. He might have been very good with the elderly. Those who knew him seemed to like him. He just was too forward, too familiar and had no common sense in resisting urges when interacting with others, traits that those who knew him well, allowed him to be. To the point that he never figured ti out to curb it among others. That he also crossed the lines when it came to rape and possibly murder, was very much situational and opportunistic, IMO. Not something most people who knew him would see. It's not as though evil people always have the visible horns. He reigned it in except when the opportunity struck. What's terrifying is that, yes, there are people like that and you often can't ID them. For every JM that would cross those terrible lines, there are many who won't and are just buffoons and leches and on the make, but would not push things beyond a certain point. JM likely did push on and did so despite knowing well that the consequences could be harsh. Had to get kicked out of 2 schools for close to the same transgression. Didn't learn.

The way this body was found fits the scrip of JM well, IMO. Not that far, in area familiar to him. Hardly went off the road, easy dump. Not a whole lot of work involved here. Pretty much what I would have expected. Private property is it ? Would have thought public would have been searched

 

[EmmaRose]

Absolutely---I remember nail polish comparison tests done in the case of a young girl who went missing a looong time ago while on Spring break vacation, iirc...turns out, she was likely victim of a serial killer who was passing through and staying at a nearby hotel...trying to remember her name...

Hey Margarita, just playing catch up here so if no one answered this yet, I wanted to say the girl was Coleen Orsborne-victim of Christopher Wilder. The police investigator took samples of all her nail polish colors for later ID purposes.

 

[Sachi]

I believe it has been estimated at 5 miles in several posts and by way of maps in them. Sorry to the poster who asked how far was the current skeleton remains from MH's. I meant to reply with quote. New here and fumblng.

 

[Eileen730]

I'm having trouble visualizing this location. Didn't we hear that she was found near the road?

Me too! Seems far from the road as I see it!
Unless there is a road back by the creek.

 

[Skigirl]

BBM.

No, you aren't. Legally you are not guilty.

Innocent until proven guilty is a baseline for a trial to start from, it places a greater burden on the state than when indicting someone. If the state fails in their burden to present enough facts to convict and you are found not guilty you are acquitted of the charges. You are not presumed to be innocent.

I highly doubt any court would say O.J. or Casey Anthony were innocent. They would say "found not guilty" because there is a distinction. It's as if the evidence is on trial, and if the evidence is not strong enough for a conviction a not guilty verdict must be rendered. It says nothing of innocence.

I apologize to the mods and forum viewers for going into this, I just don't want the wrong information regarding the laws and criminal trial to be repeated.

Sorry, LI, I did a double-take because this is really not at all the way I understood things. You are innocent until proven guilty. If the state does not prove you guilty, but virtue of the fact that you went through a trial... your status is now forever changed to "not proven guilty"??? I am shocked.

 

[ChiaPet]

I'm a big fan of the podcast Stuff You Should Know and listened to a really interesting podcast on vultures not too long ago. Here is a link if anyone is interested: http://www.stuffyoushouldknow.com/podcasts/scare-vulture/

In the podcast they reference a story from France where a woman tragically fell off a cliff while hiking with some friends and in the 45 minutes it took the rescuers to get to her, the vultures had already reduced her to bones. This quote from the article really stood out to me and frankly, kind of freaked me out. I had NO idea vultures were that efficient!

“There were only bones, clothes and shoes left on the ground,” Major Didier Pericou told The Times of London. "They took 45 to 50 minutes to eat the body." Adding, "When we first went out in the helicopter looking for the body, we saw numerous vultures without realizing what they were doing."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/05/06/woman-eaten-by-vultures-cliff_n_3224746.html

 

[Coldpizza]

:coffeecup: Good morning, new thread coming up.

 

[Skigirl]

In order of your questions:

1-Of course you can be considered innocent, if the real perpetrator is eventually convicted or direct evidence can prove it wasn't you; for example-not your DNA.

2-Innocent until proven guilty is a legality, a baseline as I said. If you were truly considered innocent you wouldn't have been charged in the first place.

3-Obviously not.

A verdict is about whether the state proved it's case (guilty verdict) or not (not guilty verdict). Period.

Oh, I did not see this post when I posted essentially the same question. I think this all conflates legal status with what people, with their constitutional right to free speech (and free thought) believe to be true. You can't force people to believe you are innocent, even though legally you are not guilty.

 

[baltolady]

Same here. I just get the 6 likes. Earlier I either clicked on the web page or something, but it said the company Mountainview Adult Home was established in 2010 and had two employees. It also listed the same phone number as shown on Facebook. Can't recall exactly where I found that though

I think I found the information you are referring to, ILOKAL.

http://www.manta.com/c/mr44ppr/mountainview-adult-home


<snipped by me>

From the listing:

<Categorized under Residential Care Homes. Our records show it was established in 2010 and incorporated in Virginia. Current estimates show this company has an annual revenue of 81000 and employs a staff of approximately 2.>

ETA: Really screwed up responding to ILOKAL's post. lol

 

[Coldpizza]

New thread, please move on over, this one will close in about 5 minutes.

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...Oct-2014-**Awaiting-Forensic-Confirmation**-3

:tyou:

 

[Conductor71]

I think he's off base or doesnt know about the tip phoned in on October 6th about the multitude of buzzards seen on the property where its believed HG's body was found (my apologies)

If turkey buzzards had already found the body on the 6th then its highly likely that a group of 6-10 could have picked it clean in 12 days time.

And MH's body which was exposed to the elements for 100 days had some tissue and hair remaining? The location of her remains bordered national forest....ummm could be I guess. Just seems odd there were be scattered bones and little else. Just my opinion.

Not to mention, it is unprecedented for a LEO officer to reveal information like this in an open investigation when remains have not even been positively identified.