Trial date set for Sidney and Tammy Moorer? #2

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
Madeleine74 said:
They didn't 'secure' the car because they (LE) didn't know a crime had been committed at that point. The car was locked. T.E. was the registered owner of said car. He was called because the car appeared to be abandoned and had been called to get it. T.E. also didn't know a crime had been committed. (Is the expectation that LE must be psychic?)

This can be addressed with proper questioning by the state:

Q: Officer SoandSo, at the time you called T.E. to let him know a car registered in his name was sitting at PTL, did you know that his daughter had been kidnapped? (No.)
Q: Officer SoandSo, at that time had anyone reported a missing woman, a woman associated with that car? (No.)
Q: Officer SoandSo, at that time had anyone reported hearing any kind of disturbance, a scream, a woman crying, or anything like that? (No.)
Q: Officer SoandSo, was the car locked? (yes). Did you open the car yourself? (no). Did you start touching things in the car? (No) Did you know that the young woman who used that particular car was missing? (no)
Q: Officer SoandSo, when an abandoned vehicle is called in and the registered owner is found and comes to get the car do you seize the car and tow it to the CSI vehicle compound just in case something may have happened to the person who normally drives the car? (No) Why not? (We would only do this if there was a report of a possible crime committed and that would be based on directions from Sgt ThisnThat.)

Reasonable actions and nonactions...
Click to expand...

Who's on first...

Sorry, I could not help myself.
 
And so the result of not 'securing'/'processing' the scene at that time is....the same. No matter how 'reasonable' people were.
Click to expand...

If that was the only requirement no crimes could ever be solved or convictions obtained. Fortunately most people are able to use their common sense as they listen to testimony and are able to understand a sequence of events in which a vehicle may later come to be important but that isn't known immediately. Besides, whatever happened to Heather didn't happen inside her vehicle, she got out of that car and was taken away, not in her own vehicle.
 
Madeleine74 said:
If that was the only requirement no crimes could ever be solved or convictions obtained. Fortunately most people are able to use their common sense as they listen to testimony and are able to understand a sequence of events in which a vehicle may later come to be important but that isn't known immediately. Besides, whatever happened to Heather didn't happen inside her vehicle, she got out of that car and was taken away, not in her own vehicle.
Click to expand...

I've never argued that convictions are based on a single aspect of evidence. I've said having no evidence of a crime at the crime scene is a problem.

So since it's indeed not just about the car and is about all the evidence they have, common sense tells me that having to ask for an NP because 'all' was insufficient is not an inspiring theme.
 
I think the mistaken dna labeling with Heather's dna (first it was from the M's truck than corrected to say it was from Heather's car) was the strong evidence the state had. Once it was determined the location was mistaken then what could they do? I'm anxious about tomorrow. I still don't understand TM filing the late motion on Friday and her trial hasn't even been scheduled. I wonder if she's insisting this be done against the advice of her attorney.
 
bestill said:
I think the mistaken dna labeling with Heather's dna (first it was from the M's truck than corrected to say it was from Heather's car) was the strong evidence the state had. Once it was determined the location was mistaken then what could they do? I'm anxious about tomorrow. I still don't understand TM filing the late motion on Friday and her trial hasn't even been scheduled. I wonder if she's insisting this be done against the advice of her attorney.
Click to expand...

I don't quite understand the BBM either. I don't see how this will fly. The state is probably not prepared for Tammy to be part of the hearing.
 
Will someone please post what time the hearing starts tomorrow. Thanks ~ ~
 
Put yourself in the shoes of a parent that has a police officer show up at your front door and tell you that they found your child's car abandoned at a boat landing.

What would you think/do?
 
Depends on the age of the 'child' and if that child lived at home or alone. An abandoned car may not actually be 'abandoned.' It may mean 'parked/left in that spot' while with others/riding in others' car. If you can reach said child via phone or email then you can ask them why they left their car where it was found. And in the case of T.E. if you can't reach said child and their phone is either turned off or out of service then that's the sign something may be wrong.
 
Just throwing a bit of positivity out into the universe for Heather tonight..

I don't linger around on the thread much anymore because I'm trying to remain hopeful and positive about this trial. I understand that the state has made a few errors in this case, but I'm still confident the Ms are responsible for Heather's disappearance, and I'm hoping like hell they don't get away with it.
 
PeterThomasFan said:
Put yourself in the shoes of a parent that has a police officer show up at your front door and tell you that they found your child's car abandoned at a boat landing.

What would you think/do?
Click to expand...

I'd probably first think suicide.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 143 more.
Total: 4,491 (members: 144, guests: 4,347)

Online statistics

Members online
144
Guests online
4,347
Total visitors
4,491
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,486
Messages
17,969,657
Members
228,788
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top