Indecent Exposure Charges

[SeriouslySearching]

I really don't think sleuthers need to be concerned whether LE, including experts from the FBI, know to thoroughly investigate a case and look for digital evidence. These people are the professionals and this is their job. Experts are consulted in partnership. The FBI in particular has dedicated facilities and experts for just digital and telephonic evidence. Most police departments have the ability to extract the contents of cell phones and computer hard drives. Just for prosecuting drug crimes they'd need the ability to look for and find electronic/digital evidence. For some reason assumptions are often made that LE doesn't know how to do their job, which I never understand.

You would think this to be true. Yet in case after case I have watched as LE dropped the ball and did not process such evidence or missed vital evidence due to inexperience.

People believe LE agencies across the country have such capabilities, but many do not have the funding it takes and they will not bring in the FBI to take advantage of their experts and labs. When I found our police department (in a city of 400,000 people) took commercial surveillance videos to the television station to pull a still shot to be used to ID suspects...it changed my view of how sophisticated their equipment is inhouse and their capabilities.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

Actually, this is what I said re: IE:

"If the police went looking for video footage to check SM's story of where he was when he said he was there, that makes sense to me. If the police went looking for footage after SM's remarks, to trap the M's while they gathered more evidence for the rest of their case, then charged the M's with IE to get them detained, that's different.

They didn't use the IE charges to "trap" anyone, but they did have to verify his story since he was trying to use it as an alibi. LE also wanted to be able to show the indifference it takes to have sex twice on the same night as killing a person after sending the victim photos to further torture her. It will speak volumes in court.

As for LE setting out to find any charges they could to hold these particular suspects...Bravo! TM and SM were a danger to the public and their own family. It is too bad they didn't find something much sooner on the two of them which could have saved a fair amount of grief and torture for the Elvis family.

 

[CHERIE.T]

Actually, this is what I said re: IE:

"If the police went looking for video footage to check SM's story of where he was when he said he was there, that makes sense to me. If the police went looking for footage after SM's remarks, to trap the M's while they gathered more evidence for the rest of their case, then charged the M's with IE to get them detained, that's different.

I'm not arguing with you.
This IS your quote copied directly from above...

Originally Posted by jillycat View Post
Unless Heather was in the car with the M's during the IE, or the timeline of the IE directly supports a case for murder, the IE charges are a sideshow, in my view.

The M's had sex in a car? So?

 

[Madeleine74]

You would think this to be true. Yet in case after case I have watched as LE dropped the ball and did not process such evidence or missed vital evidence due to inexperience.

People believe LE agencies across the country have such capabilities, but many do not have the funding it takes and they will not bring in the FBI to take advantage of their experts and labs. When I found our police department (in a city of 400,000 people) took commercial surveillance videos to the television station to pull a still shot to be used to ID suspects...it changed my view of how sophisticated their equipment is inhouse and their capabilities.

But we know already in this case, which is the one we're discussing here, Horry County already used experts to take the video they spotted along the route to PTL and sent it off for enhancement. One article I read said it was sent to the FBI in Quantico, VA. I don't know if that's accurate, but it makes sense the video was enhanced for better visual acuity.

I have no reason to think Horry County would fail to utilize other agencies if they needed to in this case since they've already called upon at least one set of experts. Sure, I can find exceptions and situations in every possible permutation if I look hard enough, and I think we all probably can. But that's not the point. Besides, testing of evidence is done by other departments, usually a state crime lab, occasionally an outside lab, usually based on the evidence collected at the scene by a CSI tech person.

It happens in many cases; armchair speculatators (my made up word) secretly believe they are managing a criminal case from the sidelines. It's probably not dissimilar to men who think they're on the coaching staff of whatever pro football team they watch on Monday nights at home, drinking their beer, and think the head coach can actually hear them in his headset.

I don't tell my accountant how to do his job and I wouldn't expect anyone in LE to go to the Interwebs to get a to-do list from members of the public.

 

[SeriouslySearching]

I really don't think sleuthers need to be concerned whether LE, including experts from the FBI, know to thoroughly investigate a case and look for digital evidence. These people are the professionals and this is their job. Experts are consulted in partnership. The FBI in particular has dedicated facilities and experts for just digital and telephonic evidence. Most police departments have the ability to extract the contents of cell phones and computer hard drives. Just for prosecuting drug crimes they'd need the ability to look for and find electronic/digital evidence. For some reason assumptions are often made that LE doesn't know how to do their job, which I never understand.

But we know already in this case, which is the one we're discussing here, Horry County already used experts to take the video they spotted along the route to PTL and sent it off for enhancement. One article I read said it was sent to the FBI in Quantico, VA. I don't know if that's accurate, but it makes sense the video was enhanced for better visual acuity.

I have no reason to think Horry County would fail to utilize other agencies if they needed to in this case since they've already called upon at least one set of experts. Sure, I can find exceptions and situations in every possible permutation if I look hard enough, and I think we all probably can. But that's not the point. Besides, testing of evidence is done by other departments, usually a state crime lab, occasionally an outside lab, usually based on the evidence collected at the scene by a CSI tech person.

It happens in many cases; armchair speculatators (my made up word) secretly believe they are managing a criminal case from the sidelines. It's probably not dissimilar to men who think they're on the coaching staff of whatever pro football team they watch on Monday nights at home, drinking their beer, and think the head coach can actually hear them in his headset.

I don't tell my accountant how to do his job and I wouldn't expect anyone in LE to go to the Interwebs to get a to-do list from members of the public.

I was only responding to what you posted and it didn't mention this case exclusively. Actually, it didn't mention this case at all.

The video surveillance of the vehicle was sent to the FBI in Quantico, Va., and to the S.C. Highway Patrol’s Multi-Disciplinary Accident Investigation Team with a request to identify the vehicle, Elder said.

http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/20...imony-weaves-a-tale-of-how.html#storylink=cpy

Rhodes said there's a task force of about 15 investigators, which in addition to Horry County police investigators, includes two Myrtle Beach police detectives, two Horry County sheriff's office deputies, a solicitor's office investigator and a State Law Enforcement Division profiler and at least three SLED investigators.

Also on the case are individual investigators from the U.S. Marshall's Office and FBI. Horry County police Lt. Chip Squires leads the task force.

http://www.myhorrynews.com/news/crime/article_ada6ad1c-8f77-11e3-8ca7-001a4bcf6878.html

The articles I have posted do appear to verify local LE called in various agencies to assist. Good call on this case with the fact they still have no body. They should have experts going through the computers, cell phones, and everything else in order to put together a solid case, but I haven't seen it as factual information.

No. I don't think anyone here really believes LE takes direction from John Q. Public on the internet, but I do know of several instances where they did get some ideas from people online and followed up on them. (A few were even instrumental in solving the cases.)

To characterize people who follow these cases online as anything except people with their hearts in the right place who want so much to help bring justice to our missing and murdered would be wrong.

 

[NFYIAMY]

The timing of WHEN TM and SM had sex in their vehicle has been bothering me.

Did they do the deed on the dates listed in the warrant -- or did they send the photos on the dates listed? Did it even happen at all?????

I think we have all been thinking that they did the deed and may have sent photos to Heather?

So - I went looking....and found this. I knew I remembered something from the bond hearing - but it wasn't in my notes (no idea why I didn't note this!). Anywho.....this is what SM's attorney had to say:

“My client was interviewed for long periods of time after Ms. Elvis disappeared, and during that time he mentioned to law enforcement that he had marital relations with his wife in his vehicle,” he said. “Months later (police) took his statement and obtained an arrest warrant for indecent exposure.” (Source)

So --- is that all they have? The statement SM made to LE? Since he admitted to it they used that to pull a charge? Were they desperate to lock them up while waiting on test results or other evidence stuff?

It's late (BEDTIME!) so maybe I'm forgetting something else that's been reported or stated -- but this has been gnawing at me for days. Finding that quote really has me wondering about what we've all been thinking regarding the IE charges?

 

[Madeleine74]

We don't know all that LE has and they are not going to tell us. And especially now with a gag order in place we will learn no more until trial. It's a wait 'n see.

 

[CarmonCayman]

So --- is that all they have? The statement SM made to LE? Since he admitted to it they used that to pull a charge? Were they desperate to lock them up while waiting on test results or other evidence

I think they just used that because they felt they had to act quick. JMO

Maybe they thought they were going to run. Maybe SM said something in hospital which made them feel they had to act quick so they went with what they had.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CHERIE.T]

I think they just used that because they felt they had to act quick. JMO

Maybe they thought they were going to run. Maybe SM said something in hospital which made them feel they had to act quick so they went with what they had.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's how I see it. The Ms had withdrawn 5000.00 and could leave the area at anytime. LE imo had to act fast. One piece of evidence they had on hand were the IE text.....a way for

LE to get the Ms in jail until other charges could be brought up.

 

[magnolia]

The timing of WHEN TM and SM had sex in their vehicle has been bothering me.

Did they do the deed on the dates listed in the warrant -- or did they send the photos on the dates listed? Did it even happen at all?????

I think we have all been thinking that they did the deed and may have sent photos to Heather?

So - I went looking....and found this. I knew I remembered something from the bond hearing - but it wasn't in my notes (no idea why I didn't note this!). Anywho.....this is what SM's attorney had to say:

“My client was interviewed for long periods of time after Ms. Elvis disappeared, and during that time he mentioned to law enforcement that he had marital relations with his wife in his vehicle,” he said. “Months later (police) took his statement and obtained an arrest warrant for indecent exposure.” (Source)

So --- is that all they have? The statement SM made to LE? Since he admitted to it they used that to pull a charge? Were they desperate to lock them up while waiting on test results or other evidence stuff?

It's late (BEDTIME!) so maybe I'm forgetting something else that's been reported or stated -- but this has been gnawing at me for days. Finding that quote really has me wondering about what we've all been thinking regarding the IE charges?

I've never believed the Moorer's were running around having sex in the car between Dec.17th and 18th. I think it happened awhile before Heather's disappearance. IMO

 

[Catlady2]

The timing of WHEN TM and SM had sex in their vehicle has been bothering me.

Did they do the deed on the dates listed in the warrant -- or did they send the photos on the dates listed? Did it even happen at all?????

I think we have all been thinking that they did the deed and may have sent photos to Heather?

So - I went looking....and found this. I knew I remembered something from the bond hearing - but it wasn't in my notes (no idea why I didn't note this!). Anywho.....this is what SM's attorney had to say:

“My client was interviewed for long periods of time after Ms. Elvis disappeared, and during that time he mentioned to law enforcement that he had marital relations with his wife in his vehicle,” he said. “Months later (police) took his statement and obtained an arrest warrant for indecent exposure.” (Source)

So --- is that all they have? The statement SM made to LE? Since he admitted to it they used that to pull a charge? Were they desperate to lock them up while waiting on test results or other evidence stuff?

It's late (BEDTIME!) so maybe I'm forgetting something else that's been reported or stated -- but this has been gnawing at me for days. Finding that quote really has me wondering about what we've all been thinking regarding the IE charges?

I think you may have answered your own question. I'm guessing LE asked sm (where were you what we're you doing on late 17 early 18th?) Sm admitted to some revelations during that interview! I.e handcuffs ect. I remember sms stating that the IE happened on the 17 18th around Heather's disappearance. The question I've seen debated before was whether it was the actual sending of the pictures or the physical act in public the reason for the IE charge.?

 

[SStarr33]

I think you may have answered your own question. I'm guessing LE asked sm (where were you what we're you doing on late 17 early 18th?) Sm admitted to some revelations during that interview! I.e handcuffs ect. I remember sms stating that the IE happened on the 17 18th around Heather's disappearance. The question I've seen debated before was whether it was the actual sending of the pictures or the physical act in public the reason for the IE charge.?

It is the sex act in public because the sending of the photo would be a different charge . Let me know if you want the info on the law and I will be happy to get it for you.

 

[geevee]

I think you may have answered your own question. I'm guessing LE asked sm (where were you what we're you doing on late 17 early 18th?) Sm admitted to some revelations during that interview! I.e handcuffs ect. I remember sms stating that the IE happened on the 17 18th around Heather's disappearance. The question I've seen debated before was whether it was the actual sending of the pictures or the physical act in public the reason for the IE charge.?

So where do the obstruction charges fit in? He lied to LE about his activities that evening and she lied to them about both of their activities - if they charged them with two counts of IE on the same evening then they believed them about having done that, so what is LE basing the obstruction charges on, the murder itself?

 

[Dr. Know?]

So where do the obstruction charges fit in? He lied to LE about his activities that evening and she lied to them about both of their activities - if they charged them with two counts of IE on the same evening then they believed them about having done that, so what is LE basing the obstruction charges on, the murder itself?

Good question. Maybe, "I work with businesses opened late at night and can't get in until it's closed to do work.... I was at a job and wife was clipping coupons with a family member?" Or the LE went to the house and it was said "I was clipping coupons (but wasn't) and my dh was at a job doing maintenance". If they both did it, wouldn't they have a better alibi knowing technology is there to prove otherwise & will most likely in court? It bought them a few weeks but now what's their story? Gah, I don't want to know anymore. Disgusting fools. CYA is all it's about with them. One or the other needs to speak up now. It's almost already too late if one of them did speak up. jmo

 

[CHERIE.T]

So where do the obstruction charges fit in? He lied to LE about his activities that evening and she lied to them about both of their activities - if they charged them with two counts of IE on the same evening then they believed them about having done that, so what is LE basing the obstruction charges on, the murder itself?

We likely won't find that out until trial. Although I am very curious too.

 

[magnolia]

Unless Heather was in the car with the M's during the IE, or the timeline of the IE directly supports a case for murder, the IE charges are a sideshow, in my view.

The M's had sex in a car? So?

If the police went looking for video footage to check SM's story of where he was when he said he was there, that makes sense to me. If the police went looking for footage after SM's remarks, to trap the M's while they gathered more evidence for the rest of their case, then charged the M's with IE to get them detained, that's different.

They had obstruction. Even if the IE is part of what led LE to obstruction because the times didn't jive with the other info LE has, why the IE charges? Is LE going to look for footage of SM and HE car sex? It would go to TM's prior claim and possible motive, right?

Let's hope not.

LE, in my view, is neither saint or sinner. LE is a body of skilled professionals who are also human, and capable of a Jessica Ridgeway case outcome or a Peggy Hettrick case outcome. I have no opinion just yet on how well the greater case of the murder of Heather hangs together with respect to prosecution.

We'll see.

In the meantime, I hope the IE has more direct relevance to this case than law enforcement's concern about what's probably happening in lots of cars.

JMO

Where is Heather?

I totally agree with your post.

BBM -- lol, that was my reaction as well ...So????

 

[jillycat]

They didn't use the IE charges to "trap" anyone, but they did have to verify his story since he was trying to use it as an alibi. LE also wanted to be able to show the indifference it takes to have sex twice on the same night as killing a person after sending the victim photos to further torture her. It will speak volumes in court.

As for LE setting out to find any charges they could to hold these particular suspects...Bravo! TM and SM were a danger to the public and their own family. It is too bad they didn't find something much sooner on the two of them which could have saved a fair amount of grief and torture for the Elvis family.

They had the Moorer's on obstruction. Because they lied about their activities and timeline that night/next morning. And the murder charges were already on the way once LE arrested them for obstructing and grabbed more circumstantial evidence from the property.

So, I'm saving my Bravo's for the proof of kidnapping and murder portion of the case. Because I would hate to see the IE could become the glove or the creepy drawings or the WMD hidden in Syria direction. JMO

 

[Catlady2]

So where do the obstruction charges fit in? He lied to LE about his activities that evening and she lied to them about both of their activities - if they charged them with two counts of IE on the same evening then they believed them about having done that, so what is LE basing the obstruction charges on, the murder itself?

Your guess is as good as mine on that one. They seem to be pretty avid liars so probably A-Z were lies with a sand grain of truth mixed in. Sm tm lied to each other, uncle Sam and LE. Sm faced cuffs on all 3. I wonder if either have been introduced to the general population yet? I hope they put a snitch in with them. They may talk in their sleep. Lol

 

[imamaze]

If I sent a pic to someone's phone would my phone keep a copy of what was sent and to whom it was sent to?

 

[Madeleine74]

If I sent a pic to someone's phone would my phone keep a copy of what was sent and to whom it was sent to?

Yes, unless you deleted the message with the picture and the picture and any other files associated with taking the picture from the phone along with the entry on the SMS log. But deleted doesn't mean it's actually gone.

This data is easily recoverable during a data dump from the phone that LE often does. And, while the picture itself might not be available to show, the carrier would also have a record of the message sent and probably details like size of message, along with the standard date/time/year/number, etc etc.