CO CO - Kelsey Berreth, 29, Woodland Park, Teller County, 22 Nov 2018 - #47 *ARREST*

Status
Not open for further replies.
Good morning! As some of you know I was
Having problems logging on with my
Phone... well ,
I got
A
New phone!

To answer @PommyMommy Question, yes
I will take the dog
For a walk over
There. And photograph it --
What am I looking
For again?!
Woo-hoo! Welcome back! We had a rather long discussion about the neighbor's camera and why it didn't seem to capture all of the activity at KB's condo. We want to know exactly where that camera is mounted and perhaps if you could discern the angle of the camera. Thanks!
 
Totally agree with you. I dont want to lose any money. :)

I expect PF's case to go to trial and it is shaping up to be a doozy of a trial.

A lot of the same great points that our WS people are bringing up here will likely be the same points argued by the defense and prosecution during the trial.

Trials have been described before as a tennis match because of how the flow of a trial goes back and forth as the prosecution and defense argue their points back and forth. This trial is going to be more like a hockey game with many players in the penalty box. LOL :)

No one wants to take on that bet :(

I like your hockey game analogy and agree.

I have heard that some smart ones in LE and prosecution and even defense attorneys review sites like this to see where the holes in their cases may lie, if an average person (or a lot of them question something) on these various sites then they know an average juror may as well... Others scoff at it... No idea if it is true or not, but I think it would be a good jury test pool to read such things :)
 
There's so much confusion between the AA and the tweets from the preliminary hearing. Is there any chance that there will be a transcript released from the Feb. 19th hearing? It really would help clear up a few things, or not :)

I don't recall the courtroom transcript ever being made part of the no cost, public record so don't expect to see 2/19 transcript unless purchased/published by other.

Agree about the confusion-- especially if reader is not aware of the context behind the AA or tweet!

During the 2/19 hearing, although testimony was basically limited to that by WPPD Officer Adams or CBI Slater, depending on whether the tweet occurred during direct, cross examination, or redirect examination, their respective testimony as tweeted could appear inconsistent, and therefore individual tweets were subjected to scrutiny-- only adding to the confusion.

IMO, the later courtroom updates that included both context and consolidated tweet info really helped clear up much of the live reporting by tweet confusion.

For comparison, the following "courtroom update" of 2/19 hearing translates to about 20 pages. I'd expect the actual hearing transcript to be multiple of this consolidated update.

Courtroom updates: Preliminary hearing for Patrick Frazee, who is accused of killing Kelsey Berreth
 
I don't recall the courtroom transcript ever being made part of the no cost, public record so don't expect to see 2/19 transcript unless purchased/published by other.

Agree about the confusion-- especially if reader is not aware of the context behind the AA or tweet!

During the 2/19 hearing, although testimony was basically limited to that by WPPD Officer Adams or CBI Slater, depending on whether the tweet occurred during direct, cross examination, or redirect examination, their respective testimony as tweeted could appear inconsistent, and therefore individual tweets were subjected to scrutiny-- only adding to the confusion.

IMO, the later courtroom updates that included both context and consolidated tweet info really helped clear up much of the live reporting by tweet confusion.

For comparison, the following "courtroom update" of 2/19 hearing translates to about 20 pages. I'd expect the actual hearing transcript to be multiple of this consolidated update.

Courtroom updates: Preliminary hearing for Patrick Frazee, who is accused of killing Kelsey Berreth
I just wish we didn't have to rely on tweets. That has to be challenging for the reporters. But thanks to them for being there and doing their best.
 
It was on the heels of the Laci/Scott Peterson case. The similarity of SP, MH, and PF is the living a lie/double life aspect. Doting husbands/fiancé but with a secret life - girlfriends for SP and PF, and in MH's case, he hadn't completed his undergraduate degree and was not about to enter medical school as he'd told his wife Lori, who was pregnant with their first child. They could not just break up/ask for a divorce/confess the truth. Their solution was murder (!).

I was thinking about the Peterson case the other day, have thought about it a lot. I thought of the difference in AF and KK. AF was played by SP, thinking he was single, and she did the RIGHT thing. KK was probably not played but was a total part of it from the beginning and as the other woman participated. AF's daughter can be so very proud of her mom. KK's kids I feel sorry for.

From day one also KB's mom reminded me of LP's mom. In many ways.

I followed that case big time.
 
Woo-hoo! Welcome back! We had a rather long discussion about the neighbor's camera and why it didn't seem to capture all of the activity at KB's condo. We want to know exactly where that camera is mounted and perhaps if you could discern the angle of the camera. Thanks!

If the ARLO-1 camera is mounted in the position we have described, then it's base is mounted on the north-south surface of the wall of the condo to the east, which defines is the east edge of the walkway to that unit's front door. There is a swivel between the base and the camera itself, allowing the owner to aim it for the best picture of the prime target, which we can assume was their front door. The camera has 110 degrees of view in live action camera, but does not take a still photograph of anywhere near that width. A still shot is like a "view within a view".
It can be assumed that the owner would adjust it so that the entire door area of their condo was in the picture, with only a sliver of the wall that the camera is mounted on, showing at the extreme left edge of the view. The camera would also be pointed downward at sifficient angle to center the door, top to bottom, in the view. Note in the link I've posted that the ARLO-! has a very limited top-to-bottom view.
Basically, if all this was done, the front door of the neighbor's condo would appear in the same position as the toy tent in the photograph at the link. KB's front door would appear far in the background, where the hedge is, and slightly to the right of the neighbors door. A person stepping into the view would do so to the left of the blue lawn chair. A person passing the front fender of one of KB's parked vehicles would first appear on the sensor and live camera view somewhere off the right side of the picture.
So, let's say PF was waiting for KB to arrive, and pulls out to let her in to park. She gets out and heads toward the foor, tripping the sensor and activating the live camera. She is at the door inserting the key when PF enters the field, tripping the field again. The camera captures a side view of PF approaching the door, and a side view of KB at the door, with the child carrier.
Later, PF goes back to the condo and trips the camera, but is in a bigger rush and the still photo captures him walking just short of the door, with his back to the ARLO-1 camera view.
At some point, the utility guy trips from the same angle as PF, but stops momentarily to check the "269" on the condo against the address in his book or device. Because he is slower than PF was, his image is captured full side view and he is easily identified.
There is some "fade" in the sensor's ability to pick up movement, toward the edges of the view, where the exact moment of trip is "iffy", and sunlight would certainly be a factor as the afternoon progressed, so there are a lot of variables. IMO
What is a camera’s field of view and how is it different on different Arlo outdoor wire-free cameras? | Answer | Arlo Support
 
I was thinking about the Peterson case the other day, have thought about it a lot. I thought of the difference in AF and KK. AF was played by SP, thinking he was single, and she did the RIGHT thing. KK was probably not played but was a total part of it from the beginning and as the other woman participated. AF's daughter can be so very proud of her mom. KK's kids I feel sorry for.

From day one also KB's mom reminded me of LP's mom. In many ways.

I followed that case big time.
Me, too. That was the first case I followed. I even went to Laci's house and met one of the Modesto Bee reporters and some fellow sleuthers there (not from this site). AF absolutely did the right thing, and yet, she was criticized by many (not me). She stepped up as soon as she figured out that her "boyfriend" had a missing, pregnant wife and allowed police to record her phone conversations. KKL on the other hand, did everything spectacularly wrong. She, unfortunately, will not make a sympathetic witness. I predict that the defense will grill her mercilessly. MOO
 
Time ago I did understand, PF used a ladder to climb up with the tote (and wondered about his strength/power) and he used the tractor, to bring the tote down from above. - What is the ladder-thingi? When did he use it?

My recollection is PF used tractor to place the tote in the barn on hay stack per the AA #71; and CBI Slater testified that KK held steady a ladder for PF when he moved tote to a haystack, and that PF then loaded tote in his truck, and took it to his property [for burning].

ETA: Reference CBI Slater testimony about 2:30pm on 2/19/19.
 
An afterthought on the ARLO-1 camera:
Let's look at the scenario of PF exiting the condo. He opens the door, picks up the tote and walks briskly through the door and out to his red truck. The ARLO-1 is tripped when he essentially bursts into the sensing field at the position of the toy tent in the link. He is moving quickly toward the real time motion camera, growing larger with each step. The still camera focuses on the door area, and finds nothing there. Before it can swing back to it's right within the motion camera view, PF is out of sight, setting the tote down between the right rear bumper of KB's green Toyota and his red truck. IMO
(same link as above)
What is a camera’s field of view and how is it different on different Arlo outdoor wire-free cameras? | Answer | Arlo Support
 
Kelsey Berreth murder case: Patrick Frazee wants wrongful death suit dismissed

March 4, 2019 Denver Post

[...]
Patrick Frazee, 32, filed a motion in Teller County District Court on Friday asking a judge to deny a claim by Berreth’s parents, Cheryl-Lee Ellen Berrethand Darrell Lynn Berreth, seeking custody of 1-year-old KF

The motion contests a second amended complaint by the Berreths seeking custody of their granddaughter. The first was made by Marcie McMinimee, a special conservator for Kay, the lawsuit filed by Colorado Springs attorney Jennifer Stock says.

Colorado’s wrongful death statute clearly states that the Berreths have no standing to make a legal claim based on the alleged wrongful death of Kelsey Berreth, the motion says.

“Only her living and surviving child, KF (K Frazee), has standing to bring a wrongful death claim,” it says. “In the original complaint, plaintiffs pled that the outrageous conduct of Mr. Frazee was the alleged killing and death of their daughter at his hands … But plaintiff’s attempt to save the claim fail and it must be dismissed.”
[...]
“Patrick Frazee is entitled to dismissal because Kelsey Berreth has a daughter, which, in fact, precludes Kelsey Berreth’s parents from bringing a wrongful death claim against him. And Colorado law does not permit more than one civil suit for the death of one person,” the motion says.

A Teller County judge has repeatedly determined that the Berreths should retain temporary custody of KF.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Me, too. That was the first case I followed. I even went to Laci's house and met one of the Modesto Bee reporters and some fellow sleuthers there (not from this site). AF absolutely did the right thing, and yet, she was criticized by many (not me). She stepped up as soon as she figured out that her "boyfriend" had a missing, pregnant wife and allowed police to record her phone conversations. KKL on the other hand, did everything spectacularly wrong. She, unfortunately, will not make a sympathetic witness. I predict that the defense will grill her mercilessly. MOO

I see no reason whatsoever AF should be criticized. She was just a young woman that thought she met a charming single man (and probably thanks her lucky stars today). Even if she had fallen for him, to put thing together and pull out of those emotions and do the RIGHT thing is not easy.

There truly is no comparison between AF and KK. AF had no clue and KK did for months. AF as you said once she knew, she helped. KK knew, did nothing and when approached by LE lied.

Their mothers remind me of each other. Both have been instrumental in pushing for justice for their daughters. From everything I can see, both mothers raised very decent young women who did not deserve what happened.

KK was recorded, I would love to someday see her "confession" when she did make her deal and give them all of the details. There is nothing like seeing someone's expression, pauses, gestures, etc. I wonder if we will ever get to.

I will say one more thing about AF. She stays out of the media and does not seek notorious attention over her involvement which is so rampant these days. It says a lot about her.

jmo.
 
I thought, the evidence becomes destroyed after 1 lab test and wouldn't be available for further testing (defense) ...
What, if it has to do with the cinnamon rolls? LE found evidence "in" the rolls, if I don't remember wrong.

Oh no, not the cinnamon rolls! Though I will admit, the word “consumptive” did bring those cinnamon rolls back into my head.
 
I’m actually kind of glad the judge ruled against releasing the exhibits from the prelim hearing. Even though I feel in my heart PF is 100% without a doubt guilty, I don’t want another Casey anthony verdict. I know stuff is already in The media (we’ve been reading and talking about it for months), but I’d rather it come out at trial and the jury have fresh eyes looking at it than it being released now and they be tainted and it possibly sway them for not guilty based on that.
 
My impression is that the motion concerning destructive testing is a big debate over very minute topics, that cannot be resolved until the defense's expert can confer at length with the CBI expert(s) in Pueblo. At issue are:
(1) Pre-defining PF's basic right to preservation (in the event that he is convicted) under Colorado statute 18-1-1103(2). Duty to preserve DNA evidence.
(2) Agreeing on the mode of testing. Explanation:
There are two basic kinds of DNA testing used by LE. The primary one is a collection of 26 factors of "junk DNA" that is useful for individual identification, but does not affect the development of the individual. This is the common format for CODIS identification. KB may have had existing CODIS testing, from her pilot physicals, etc. The second is a full range DNA scan, with emphasis on mitochodrial DNA factors. This is the scan most commonly used by LE to identify dead persons. The problem with this testing is that KB shared the exact same mitochondrial DNA as CB, CB2 and KB's child, all of whom spent time in the crime scene and might be expected to have left some minute DNA samples. If no body is discovered, LE may want to have some samples tested one way and others tested the other. I think the problem of a defense representative being present is something that only the experts can decide for themselves. To avoid containation during testing, only one person is allowed in the "clean room" laboratory during the entire testing period, which can take place over several days. A defense expert can fully participate in the process without being in the clean room itself, but the exact procedure needs to be worked out by them, in advance, then submitted to the judge for his approval. Then, and only then, will the motion be ruled on. IMO
2016 Colorado Revised Statutes :: Title 18 - :: Criminal Code :: Article 1 - Provisions Applicable to Offenses Generally :: Part 11 - :: Preservation of DNA Evidence :: § 18-1-1103. Duty to preserve DNA evidence
 
No one wants to take on that bet :(

I like your hockey game analogy and agree.

I have heard that some smart ones in LE and prosecution and even defense attorneys review sites like this to see where the holes in their cases may lie, if an average person (or a lot of them question something) on these various sites then they know an average juror may as well... Others scoff at it... No idea if it is true or not, but I think it would be a good jury test pool to read such things :)

I have spoken to a Detective, about WS.
He had informed me that they definitely know about the sleuthing capabilities, on the sites, especially the one he was dealing with.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
156
Guests online
3,310
Total visitors
3,466

Forum statistics

Threads
594,129
Messages
17,999,418
Members
229,315
Latest member
Cheyenne1060
Back
Top