TX - Hailey Dunn, 13, murdered, Scurry County, Dec 2010 *Arrest in 2021, released in 2023* #4

[Tugela01]

I seem to remember during the initial investigation,that some flash drives were discover in a drawer. They contained adult "images"/ bestiality/ child "images".

I felt that the investigation into Hailey's disappearance may have been a secondary concern as the Feds were more concerned with tracking down the source of the child "images", perhaps an international ring?

Maybe Adkins is a state witness for the child "images"?

Your memory is incorrect. The suspected CP was on a computer that was at his mother's house and had nothing to do with him.

 

[Tugela01]

How can you keep someone locked up in jail for 2 years, have a $2M bond and not have enough evidence to bring them to trial? What is wrong with this case? What are we missing here? I always believed she was killed the night before or the morning she went missing....not that afternoon! the documents seem to suggest she was murdered that afternoon........I don't think so! Please someone! Rethink this case and look at the evidence again!

Well, obviously there is evidence that she was alive that day. The reported sighting(s)/text messages discussed over the years must be correct, which then only leaves the window of time between when SA arrived home from Big Spring and when the brother arrived home, which is a very narrow period of time. SA's whereabouts are accounted for the rest of the time.

The time frame they are referring to is the last known ping of his cell phone at Big Spring until the time the brother showed up at the house, which is about 2 hours. But the time is actually a lot less than that since he had to drive from Big Spring back home, and that would have taken up a good deal of those 2 hours. After the brother arrived back at the house SA is pretty much accounted for. So the window to have actually done something is very small and there is no evidence to suggest that SA did anything. What is a prosecutor supposed to do in that situation? They don't have a case based on the evidence and consequently they have to drop the charges. They can't just make stuff up or proceed with a case in the hope of making some emotional appeal to a jury with no evidence. That is irresponsible.

In other words it is unlikely that he is the killer since there would have only had a very short period of time to kill her, clean up and dispose of the body, and that is not realistic with the scenario many here favor, as I have been pointing out since this case began. The killer is probably someone else, and that someone is most likely someone HD knew. This is kind of what I have been saying for years now but you guys refuse to consider it.

That is why the charges were dismissed. They basically have no evidence that SA was involved in her death other than wishful thinking. They can keep on saying that of course, no one likes admitting they were wrong, especially in this sort of situation, but the bottom line is they have no evidence and they have to do their job.

I think the problem is that people got (and still are) fixated on SA because he fits what they think is a deviant and hence the likely killer, when the known facts of the case simply don't mesh with that. Someone being a deviant does not make them a killer. There is of course a real killer out there, and THAT person will likely go free because of this tunnel view people on this case have had.

 

[UK Girl]

Well, obviously there is evidence that she was alive that day. The reported sighting(s)/text messages discussed over the years must be correct, which then only leaves the window of time between when SA arrived home from Big Spring and when the brother arrived home, which is a very narrow period of time. SA's whereabouts are accounted for the rest of the time.

The time frame they are referring to is the last known ping of his cell phone at Big Spring until the time the brother showed up at the house, which is about 2 hours. But the time is actually a lot less than that since he had to drive from Big Spring back home, and that would have taken up a good deal of those 2 hours. After the brother arrived back at the house SA is pretty much accounted for. So the window to have actually done something is very small and there is no evidence to suggest that SA did anything. What is a prosecutor supposed to do in that situation? They don't have a case based on the evidence and consequently they have to drop the charges. They can't just make stuff up or proceed with a case in the hope of making some emotional appeal to a jury with no evidence. That is irresponsible.

In other words it is unlikely that he is the killer since there would have only had a very short period of time to kill her, clean up and dispose of the body, and that is not realistic with the scenario many here favor, as I have been pointing out since this case began. The killer is probably someone else, and that someone is most likely someone HD knew. This is kind of what I have been saying for years now but you guys refuse to consider it.

That is why the charges were dismissed. They basically have no evidence that SA was involved in her death other than wishful thinking. They can keep on saying that of course, no one likes admitting they were wrong, especially in this sort of situation, but the bottom line is they have no evidence and they have to do their job.

I think the problem is that people got (and still are) fixated on SA because he fits what they think is a deviant and hence the likely killer, when the known facts of the case simply don't mesh with that. Someone being a deviant does not make them a killer. There is of course a real killer out there, and THAT person will likely go free because of this tunnel view people on this case have had.

The police have not said that they believe he is innocent.

 

[Tugela01]

I have been thinking more about the "FBI" being involved. What in the what?? Is he a confidential informant on a case and is getting a "get out of jail free" card? This is insane! How can the FBI come in when there was an indictment at a local level unless they want him to fry a bigger fish?? I am still sick to my stomach over this!

No, there is no grand plot. The prosecutor appears to have been basing their case on dirt from SA's boots supposedly matching dirt from where the body was found, I am guessing it was what they were using to link SA to the crime. But the FBI forensics showed that the dirt did not actually match, consequently there was nothing tying SA to the crime. That apparently was their only involvement.

I would guess that local forensics send the samples to the FBI to confirm what they claimed to have found, but the FBI determined that the samples did not match. If the dirt was the only thing tying SA to the crime, and it did not match, then charges would have to be dropped for lack of evidence.

 

[Tugela01]

The police have not said that they believe he is innocent.

They can say what they like, the fact is there is no evidence linking SA to the crime and the window of opportunity for him to have done anything is too small.

 

[UK Girl]

They can say what they like, the fact is there is no evidence linking SA to the crime and the window of opportunity for him to have done anything is too small.

in your opinion of course

 

[Tugela01]

I personally have never believed she was killed in the afternoon

Well, there was evidence that she was alive at least until 3PM.

 

[Tugela01]

JMO - I've long felt Hailey was killed between Sunday evening, December 26th & the early morning hours of Monday, December 27th. Cleanup and loading her body occured thereafter.

Adkins could have had an accomplice who had his cell phone at 2:56. Who called Hailey's phone? I assume the call was answered because they say she could have been alive. But Adkins or someone else in the home could have answered that call.

His erratic actions the morning of December 27th point to the fact he had already killed Hailey. Lying about quitting, ditching his coveralls, going to his Grandma's house.

Further, the "witness testimony" LE is relying on for the night of the 26th and the 27th at 5 PM is HIGHLY suspect, IMO. There was a lot of covering up going on, IYKWIM. I don't believe he acted alone in other words.

I'm furious, but hoping SOME LE Agency can build a solid case and refile in the future!!

My God, it took TWO YEARS to figure out the evidence wasn't sufficent to proceed to trial? If that SOB files an action against the State, I'm going to flip my bippy.

Well, she was seen multiple times that day and sent outgoing messages. You can say that all those people were mistaken, but apparently they were not. LE, who presumably has much better information than any of us, thinks she was alive at least up to 3PM.

As for SA, the pings they are referring to are routing info for actual phone calls, and the people on the other side of those calls can corroborate that the calls were made and who made them. You can't dismiss that simply because they are not convenient to your hypothesis. There is no evidence of a plot or conspiracy.

And he did not lie about where he was on the morning, he simply was not asked and the investigators made presumptions about the meaning of his answers. He was asked where he went that day, and he provided the final destination, not the routing, and when they found out information about the routing they made conclusions that were not actually based on fact. That sort of failing has been an issue with this investigation from day one, the investigators have not been objective and were trying to fit evidence to their theory rather than the other way around. If you read the affidavits critically it is pretty obvious that there was a lot of that sort of thing going on. Maybe they were just playing dumb so they could get their search warrant, I don't know, but it did not make them look good. It was all very sloppy IMO and I think the sheriff running all of this has a lot to answer for.

 

[Tugela01]

I too remain convinced he is the guilty party, but I don't have all the facts. The interview above says he was on his way back to CCity at 3. That is why they think he killed her then. I am agreeing with Knox. I always thought she was killed earlier that day. He quit his job, returned to the house, something transpired, she died. He either went to Big Spring and hid her body somewhere....then moved her to the lake area, or he took her up to the lake (could have killed her anywhere between CCity and the lake), hid her body and kept going to Big Spring the back way. Cell phone data should tell them where his phone was pinging.

The cell phone data they have is for actual phone calls, not routine pings. The routing info for those is stored for billing purposes. It is not like they could track his exact movements, just approximately where he was when he made those calls.

You also need to remember that there are probably people who physically saw him at Big Spring and can testify that he was there the whole day between arriving and when he left.

He went to his mothers house to use the computer there since no one was at the GMs house, where he normally used a computer. There are probably logs of that computer usage as well.

I imagine it would be pretty easy for a defence lawyer to show where he was over the course of the day, the only unaccounted period would be between 3PM and 5PM, in other words between when he left Big Spring until when the brother arrived at the house. If he did anything, everything, including the trip from Big Spring back home, would have had to have happened in those two hours. Whatever scenario you want to come up with has to fit completely into that period. Remember, according to what the DA is saying, HD was alive prior to 3PM, so no hiding bodies or anything like that. It all has to be between 3 and 5.

And then there is all the blood which would have been produced, which apparently absolutely no one noticed at all.

The only way for things to be consistent with known facts is for HD to have left the house after SA arrived back home (which, according to him, was shortly after), and at some later period something happened to her at the hands of a third unknown person. So, what you should be asking is where did she go after SA came back home? Because that is where you are going to find your killer.

 

[katydid23]

Well, obviously there is evidence that she was alive that day. The reported sighting(s)/text messages discussed over the years must be correct, which then only leaves the window of time between when SA arrived home from Big Spring and when the brother arrived home, which is a very narrow period of time. SA's whereabouts are accounted for the rest of the time.

The time frame they are referring to is the last known ping of his cell phone at Big Spring until the time the brother showed up at the house, which is about 2 hours. But the time is actually a lot less than that since he had to drive from Big Spring back home, and that would have taken up a good deal of those 2 hours. After the brother arrived back at the house SA is pretty much accounted for. So the window to have actually done something is very small and there is no evidence to suggest that SA did anything. What is a prosecutor supposed to do in that situation? They don't have a case based on the evidence and consequently they have to drop the charges. They can't just make stuff up or proceed with a case in the hope of making some emotional appeal to a jury with no evidence. That is irresponsible.

In other words it is unlikely that he is the killer since there would have only had a very short period of time to kill her, clean up and dispose of the body, and that is not realistic with the scenario many here favor, as I have been pointing out since this case began. The killer is probably someone else, and that someone is most likely someone HD knew. This is kind of what I have been saying for years now but you guys refuse to consider it.

That is why the charges were dismissed. They basically have no evidence that SA was involved in her death other than wishful thinking. They can keep on saying that of course, no one likes admitting they were wrong, especially in this sort of situation, but the bottom line is they have no evidence and they have to do their job.

I think the problem is that people got (and still are) fixated on SA because he fits what they think is a deviant and hence the likely killer, when the known facts of the case simply don't mesh with that. Someone being a deviant does not make them a killer. There is of course a real killer out there, and THAT person will likely go free because of this tunnel view people on this case have had.

Why do you say the reported sighting/texts MUST be correct? IIRC, there were some doubts about the accuracy of those reports/

 

[AutumnDawn]

The cell phone data they have is for actual phone calls, not routine pings. The routing info for those is stored for billing purposes. It is not like they could track his exact movements, just approximately where he was when he made those calls.

You also need to remember that there are probably people who physically saw him at Big Spring and can testify that he was there the whole day between arriving and when he left.

He went to his mothers house to use the computer there since no one was at the GMs house, where he normally used a computer. There are probably logs of that computer usage as well.

I imagine it would be pretty easy for a defence lawyer to show where he was over the course of the day, the only unaccounted period would be between 3PM and 5PM, in other words between when he left Big Spring until when the brother arrived at the house. If he did anything, everything, including the trip from Big Spring back home, would have had to have happened in those two hours. Whatever scenario you want to come up with has to fit completely into that period. Remember, according to what the DA is saying, HD was alive prior to 3PM, so no hiding bodies or anything like that. It all has to be between 3 and 5.

And then there is all the blood which would have been produced, which apparently absolutely no one noticed at all.

The only way for things to be consistent with known facts is for HD to have left the house after SA arrived back home (which, according to him, was shortly after), and at some later period something happened to her at the hands of a third unknown person. So, what you should be asking is where did she go after SA came back home? Because that is where you are going to find your killer.

LE has not actually publicly confirmed that Hailey was alive at 3pm on that Tuesday. They said a text was sent and a call was answered, but they have not publicly said Hailey answered it. If she was alive at that time, then yes a very short window, but this has not been confirmed just yet.

For me personally the only one that has given a legit answer of when Hailey was alive, is the Aunt who she was texting and calling with all day on that Sunday. After this is just people's word, and most have lost all credibility.

 

[katydid23]

Your memory is incorrect. The suspected CP was on a computer that was at his mother's house and had nothing to do with him.

What do you meAn it his nothing to do with him? He used that computer quite regularly. IIRC, he used it that day, on his way home from quitting his job that morning.

If he used that computer also, it could have been his CP. What's more likely, it was his or it was his mother's?

 

[nannymo]

Your memory is incorrect. The suspected CP was on a computer that was at his mother's house and had nothing to do with him.

I will beg to differ-if you care to read the following: BBM

Documents Link More Pornography to Shawn Adkins

*advertiser censored* and possible child *advertiser censored* has been found on another computer that Shawn Adkins had access to.

tinyurl.com

It states:
The affidavit confirms earlier reports that child *advertiser censored* was found at Hailey's mother's house and on a computer at Adkin's mother's house in Big Spring. In fact, the documents say *advertiser censored* and images of deviant acts has been found on every electronic device connected to Adkins that has been searched by law enforcement.

Also:
The affidavit also states that some of the pornographic images retrieved from a memory stick and cell phone belonging to Shawn Adkins were made using a Kodak Easy Share camera. Two of those cameras were found at his grandmother's home in Dunn.

SO byo your memory is correct. No where does it state the images had nothing to do with him. One could argue they could be anyone's, including Shawn's. He was known to use the computer along with other people. He could have downloaded the images just as anyone else could have. It appears the cell phone and memory stick did belong to SA. AND they contained pornographic images.

 

[AutumnDawn]

The Hailey Dunn page is saying they are being told that charges were dropped because of Buddy Webbs posts that Hailey was murdered in Odessa. This is probably linked to the Brady violation that they didn't look at all other possible suspects.

He has listed people claiming she was murdered in Odessa, but they give different scenarios and locations, and there is a claim that there is a video. They are going to have to disprove all of those claims and build a solid case against Shawn, which means they have to get the timeline correct and charge any additional people that were in the house.

Go back to the beginning and work through the case...they can get a conviction, it is just going to take some work.

I know Kathleen Zellner is a defense attorney, but her investigative team is top notch, they need a team like hers.

 

[Tugela01]

The Hailey Dunn page is saying they are being told that charges were dropped because of Buddy Webbs posts that Hailey was murdered in Odessa. This is probably linked to the Brady violation that they didn't look at all other possible suspects.

He has listed people claiming she was murdered in Odessa, but they give different scenarios and locations, and there is a claim that there is a video. They are going to have to disprove all of those claims and build a solid case against Shawn, which means they have to get the timeline correct and charge any additional people that were in the house.

Go back to the beginning and work through the case...they can get a conviction, it is just going to take some work.

I know Kathleen Zellner is a defense attorney, but her investigative team is top notch, they need a team like hers.

That was not the reason the prosecutor gave in court though, and the reason the prosecutor gave is the real reason. They thought that dirt collected from SA's boots matched dirt from where HDs remains were found, but the FBI forensics disagreeed with them. Basically the evidence they thought they had to corroborate their hypothesis turned out not to be evidence and the period of opportunity was too short to have reasonably been enough to commit the crime anyway. There would have been tons of blood from the injury HD sustained, there was no evidence of any of that, and there was a maximum of 2 hours for SA to have returned to CC from BS, killed her, dropped the body at the lake, returned to CC and cleaned the house and car so thoroughly there was no trace of anything (and yes, they did a forensic search of the car and found nothing). Two hours is simply not enough. Essentially there was no case. They had no absolute proof that SA did not do it however, so they left it open, but basically the case against SA is done.

Whatever the Hailey Dunn page is claiming is just made up.

The claims about what went on in Odessa are more likely closer to the truth about what really happened to HD. I doubt SA or BD had anything to do with it. Instead, look to where HD went AFTER she left the house when SA returned to CC. That is where you will find your answers.

 

[Tugela01]

I will beg to differ-if you care to read the following: BBM

Documents Link More Pornography to Shawn Adkins

*advertiser censored* and possible child *advertiser censored* has been found on another computer that Shawn Adkins had access to.

tinyurl.com

It states:
The affidavit confirms earlier reports that child *advertiser censored* was found at Hailey's mother's house and on a computer at Adkin's mother's house in Big Spring. In fact, the documents say *advertiser censored* and images of deviant acts has been found on every electronic device connected to Adkins that has been searched by law enforcement.

Also:
The affidavit also states that some of the pornographic images retrieved from a memory stick and cell phone belonging to Shawn Adkins were made using a Kodak Easy Share camera. Two of those cameras were found at his grandmother's home in Dunn.

SO byo your memory is correct. No where does it state the images had nothing to do with him. One could argue they could be anyone's, including Shawn's. He was known to use the computer along with other people. He could have downloaded the images just as anyone else could have. It appears the cell phone and memory stick did belong to SA. AND they contained pornographic images.

The images and where they were found were listed in the affidavit.

The only CP the affidavit referred to was deleted images on the computer at SA's mothers house. It was suspected CP, not CP, in other words they were not sure. The only other questionable image was a single image attached to an email sent to the computer at the grand mothers house, which was possible CP due to some similarity with images on the computer at Big Spring. Other than that there was some regular legal *advertiser censored* on some electronic devices belonging to BD/SA, but not a lot. There was no CP in the house in Carson City.

Neither of these two computers belonged to SA, they were not at his home, he just used them on occasion when he needed access to a computer. The potential CP was on the computer at Big Spring. IIRC, aside from his mother, there were two other relatives who lived there, perhaps other people as well. The computer was theirs, not SA's, and whatever *advertiser censored* was on that computer would have belonged to one of them, not SA. Presumably it was not SA's mother since she apparently did not know what was on the computer when she allowed to police to take it and only found out later. She then went to the police to get it back, and that is when they seized it as evidence. I think it is pretty obvious who the *advertiser censored* collection actually belonged to, it is not rocket science. It is NOT SA.

The whole *advertiser censored* thing seems to just have been used an excuse by LE to fish for evidence on the HD case since they otherwise had no reason to get warrants for that. To get a warrant you need probable cause and by that point in time they had run out of probable cause with respect to BD and SA. The early probable cause cited in initial warrants had likely been refuted at that point, so there was no legal reason for them to be considered suspects. Consequently LE needed some different excuse to go looking for something in the hopes of finding something that would stick, at the very least to be able to charge them with something else in the hopes of subsequently being able to intimidate them into coming to some deal. These are the sorts of tactics a lot of poorly trained police forces resort to when they run out of leads for their prime investigation.

As for why no charges in that case, well, they need to be able to prove who downloaded the stuff and no one was fessing up, so no way to prove anything. Irrespective, the images were in the slack space, meaning they had been deleted. Whoever downloaded it probably had been downloading collections of images from torrents and places like that, then deleting material they had no interest in, which would include the images in question. Even if the images themselves were illegal, they may well have been downloaded innocently.

 

[Tugela01]

What do you meAn it his nothing to do with him? He used that computer quite regularly. IIRC, he used it that day, on his way home from quitting his job that morning.

If he used that computer also, it could have been his CP. What's more likely, it was his or it was his mother's?

There were other people living in the house. IIRC the mother had a partner and there was a teenaged brother as well. Entirely possible that other people lived there too.

 

[Tugela01]

Why do you say the reported sighting/texts MUST be correct? IIRC, there were some doubts about the accuracy of those reports/

Evidence is evidence. The prosecutors do not seem to be in doubt as they limit the window of opportunity as being between 3PM and 5PM, meaning they are confident that HD was alive when SA returned home from Big Spring and they are confident of SA's whereabouts after 5PM. That is what they have to work with and the main reason why they don't have a case, it is too short.

That and the fact that their corroborating evidence turned out to corroborate nothing when the FBI looked at it, lol. Must have been a gloomy day at the office when they got THAT report back.

You personally can doubt all you want, it is a free country, but the fact is at least three people reported seeing her that day, and there was telephonic communication by her as well. And those are just the ones we know about, there are likely others too. I think you are going to find that the activities of the principal characters that day have been witnessed by MANY people, not just the ones we are aware of.

Plus, I suspect that at least two individuals who initially publicly claimed to have had no contact with HD that day subsequently changed their story when confronted on the facts by LE later. There has been lots of lying going on in this case IMO, just way too many events that don't make sense otherwise. So, ya, I think at least two in my opinion, maybe more.

So I think the prosecutor is on pretty solid ground when he says she was alive at least until 3PM.

But, unless there is a trial, we will never know the details.

One more thing, I would not be in the least surprised if there is significant disagreement among LE themselves as to exactly who is responsible and what happened. Some of them act like keystone cops, while others are professional, there are going to be rumblings for sure. The second group is going to be horrified by the antics of the first group.

 

[Tugela01]

I have been giving this a lot of thought, going back to the events leading up to HD's disappearance, and I think there is a simple way to explain everything that happened and that is a custody conflict that got triggered when SA moved in with BD. In this scenario HD may have been hiding out with friends or acquaintances of someone in the family rather than actual family (that would result in her being found and returned home pretty fast) and then something happened to her there leading to where we are now. No one in the story was responsible for her death, it just happened because of circumstances, and afterwards no one wanted to take responsibility, so it was easy to let the finger point at SA because in a sense even if he did nothing, it was him moving in that started the ball rolling as it were. And even if they do know what really happened, it is too late to say anything about it otherwise they could be the one that ends up in jail. So everyone keeps quite and just lets SA take the blame in the public eye.

I think people have been trying to make this much more complicated than it really is, which is just a runaway case that had a tragic ending. We may be looking for a villain that does not exist (well, maybe there is one in Odessa).

 

[AutumnDawn]

That was not the reason the prosecutor gave in court though, and the reason the prosecutor gave is the real reason. They thought that dirt collected from SA's boots matched dirt from where HDs remains were found, but the FBI forensics disagreeed with them. Basically the evidence they thought they had to corroborate their hypothesis turned out not to be evidence and the period of opportunity was too short to have reasonably been enough to commit the crime anyway. There would have been tons of blood from the injury HD sustained, there was no evidence of any of that, and there was a maximum of 2 hours for SA to have returned to CC from BS, killed her, dropped the body at the lake, returned to CC and cleaned the house and car so thoroughly there was no trace of anything (and yes, they did a forensic search of the car and found nothing). Two hours is simply not enough. Essentially there was no case. They had no absolute proof that SA did not do it however, so they left it open, but basically the case against SA is done.

Whatever the Hailey Dunn page is claiming is just made up.

The claims about what went on in Odessa are more likely closer to the truth about what really happened to HD. I doubt SA or BD had anything to do with it. Instead, look to where HD went AFTER she left the house when SA returned to CC. That is where you will find your answers.

Yes, I know what was said in court.

We do not know for a fact Hailey was alive when Shawn got home at 3, this has never been proven or stated by police. The last reliable person to speak with her was her aunt. We have a timeline from Sunday evening to Tuesday afternoon. For me that means that anyone who was around her during that timeline had the ability to commit this crime.

To say Shawn is innocent means you have to trust what he is saying, not actual evidence proving he is actually innocent. He himself said for LE to look at him and Billie and that she could be found in Scurry county according to the affidavits, and that is exactly where she was found.

His claim that she left the house at 3 means absolutely nothing. They have the phone call close to 3, that is the only other witness that can tell them if she was alive or not at that time, and unfortunately we do not know the answer to this.