LA - Mickey Shunick, 21, Lafayette 19 May 2012 - #31

Status
Not open for further replies.
If we're talking a time frame of 30+ seconds, then my physics discussion is a moot point. That was evoked to debunk the idea that this all occurred within a very short time frame (1-4 seconds), and involved some physics-defying phenomena occurring.

But 30+ seconds allows for MS to circle around (backtrack) and, in theory here, put herself in position to be hit closer to University and thrown off to the side, and slightly forward, to a landing position in the area as you suggest, with the bike being dragged forward to the place it is alleged by some here to be seen in the frame which includes the pic of the DWT in front of Circle K.

That said, there are all of the other things to consider -- including ACI's info, along with the idea that LE would likely not be releasing a photo of MS at/shortly after the moment of alleged impact.

And the fact that, IMO, it is highly unlikely Mickey would have circled all the way around and backtracked. I understand how that is what would make the physics of it work but again, there we start creating facts to fit a theory instead of finding the theory that fits the facts. JMO
 
Very valid point. However I was granting that LE had given us correct info regarding sequencing and time stamping of the pics. If you'll go back to where I became involved in the discussion, you'll see that I was trying to dispel a very specific interpretation of what we're seeing, based on some very specific "facts" being assumed by those making said interpretations.

Has LE ever given us the sequencing of the photos or is that something that was sluethed here?
 
I've been reading this forum since thread #1. I've spent a lot of time wasting away in front of my computer screen reading everyones thoughts and opinions. I would literally read each and every post on every thread.. until the "Mickey under truck" theories started emerging.

I'm sorry. I'm really not trying to offend anyone but this theory is just NOT possible. I'm not even saying that because of pyshics or how far her bike could have/should have moved. I'm saying this because there is NO WAY the police department would have overlooked such CRUCIAL evidence in Mickeys disappearance. Even if the video stills are not continuous, it would STILL have been seen. I know a lot of you are editing the pictures, some of you may even have advanced skills in doing so, but what makes you think the police department does not have someone to do that for them with skills far superior than any of us?

I just cannot believe the police department, their private investigator, ACI, the family, and millions of others who have seen the picture of the truck would MISS something like this. Not to mention, all of the people who are at the circkle K! I might not be super observant all the time, but i'm pretty damn sure id see someone on a bike getting hit, and then the driver of the vehicle getting out of the car, picking her AND the bike up and putting them inside the truck. It's just not possible.

I really feel that this thread has lost some of validity based on the truck theory. I know I have found myself skipping over posts and even whole pages just to find something based on fact.

Sorry if this offends someone (and i'm sure it will) but i've been stewing over this for days now and had to get this off of my chest.

So well put I had to bump it (if that's the right terminology).
 
It's important to note that if she wasn't stopped (and her posture in the picture definitely looks to me like she's pedaling) then a reasonable estimate of her speed would be 15 miles per hour. That means she would be travelling 22 feet every second. So in a second she would have moved well out of the picture.

Very true. I believe she was moving also.

*Waves big to fellow Alabamian/Alabamette*
 
We could go aalll the way back to my Perp On Foot theory.

Someone quietly steps out of a shadow, knocks or grabs MS off of her bike, takes MS and the bike into a nearby residence, closed business or dark driveway, dumps the bike later.

If it happened at the end of that municipal parking lot it could explain why it's out of frame and why Mickey doesn't appear anywhere else.

Well I have a little theory......all just speculation but I think it is completely possible someone could have approached her with something like " hey miss can I use your phone?" "Hey miss do you have a cigarette I could have?" Or asking for directions or have you seen my dog? .......speculation only.......so I imagine she stops to offer assistance or be nice lets him use her phone and he walks off with it or he snatches her whole purse and runs ....
All speculation only......its completely possible that the perp ran in the direction from which she had just came......she could have chased on her bike and dropped it in the toad where it could have ended up run over by truck while she wasn't on it.....like dropped her bike there to chase after someone (that satisfies those who think the bike is under the truck).....pure speculation .....or she could have ridden her bike or chased someone on foot through the parking lot there (that satisfies the photo cropping conspiracy theorists-like me) ....all just speculation........or she could have chased on her bike or followed on foot somewhere else not on camera......perp simply went back and picked up bike or evidence left behind afterward.....also two perps on foot highly possible in my opinion I think it is quite possible that all they wanted from the get go was her bike.

My personal preference as far as theories go is the perp on foot theory.....all speculation...but it answers any and all questions pretty much by all the different. "categories" of theorists I've seen so far. ......
Like no personal belongings left behif
 
There are many reasons I don't believe that Mickey is under the truck but I'll only discuss this one for now. I agree that it looks like the DWT is rolling over something but the more people try to zoom in and "clear it up," the less I see. I also find it impossible for anything to have happened right there. I frequent that particular Circle K often and it is MUCH closer than it appears in the camera still. Anyone parked or in line inside the store would have seen something not to mention those at the pump. Today in particular, I went in to that Circle K at 5pm which is a very busy and noisy time. As I walked out a car turning into the LCG parking lot EXACTLY into the opening visible on the camera stills, and brushed the curb and I heard it and looked up as did 2 people next to me. I find it very hard to believe she could have been hit right there without ANYONE seeing and coming forward. This isn't some high crime street code ruled area. Someone would have said something. That's my opinion based on my experience with that exactly area on almost a daily basis.
 
I'm getting aggravated with my phone!

Anyway, no evidence left behind. No screams heard or collision witnessed.(that's the kind of thing that makes dogs bark like crazy!) Moo but perp on foot theory accounts for a lot of things such as lack of evidence. Moo
 
What you are probably seeing as a Darth Vader helmet, I am seeing as Batman, lol.
LOL I see a big jack-o-lantern under the red circle and it has a triangle nose. (I'm kind of worried about what this says about my mental and emotional maturity. :D)
 
Where do we go anyway? Even if turns out that was not Mickey, somehow...she is still gone. The whole thing about where she was last does not help to know where she is now, at least not unless the driver of the truck is identified and proven to be involved. Then maybe a location could be worked out. But I still believe she was left near her bike.

Don't get me wrong, I do believe the family when they say it was Mickey. My only point was we can't dismiss facts just because they don't fit our theory. I only wish I knew where we go. With so little information to go on, its difficult to say.
 
I'm getting aggravated with my phone!

Anyway, no evidence left behind. No screams heard or collision witnessed.(that's the kind of thing that makes dogs bark like crazy!) Moo but perp on foot theory accounts for a lot of things such as lack of evidence. Moo
Perp on foot (out of his car) or in his vehicle
that knew Mickey and where she lived (why he dumped the bike far from Lafayette),
waited for her to enter her dark neighborhood (away from videocameras/traffic/witnesses)
makes sense too.
 
I wish we at least knew what we are dealing with too. Should us local girls be scared for our lives? Or do we not have any reason to be scared? I just really wish we knew more
 
I can guarantee that whether she was moving forward or stopped, whether the truck was going 1 m.p.h or 100 m.p.h., regardless of what part of the truck struck what part of the bike, whether the roads were wet or whether they were dry, that if Mickey was struck, there would be some forward movement to her bike and body from being struck from behind. She may go under the truck, she may go on top of the hood, but either way, there is still forward movement of her body and bike. She only ends up under or over the truck because the truck was moving at a greater velocity than Mickey was, but still at a point that was forward of the initial impact. MOO

A vehicle breaking is still a moving vehicle. So yes, there may have been some forward movement. The truck is stronger than the bike so if a back wheel is hit and trapped under a bumper or tire of a truck, the bike is going to stop when the truck does. That's what breaks do: defy physics with force.

"When the front of the car dipped under braking application before impact, the rider was projected ahead of the car and came to rest further from the point of impact than the car did. When the car was not braking at impact, and when the rider is astride the cycle as though riding and not standing, the cyclist is thrown off the side of the car after being ramped back onto the windshield. "

"Ride time for the cyclist on the car was not discussed in any other cited treatments of this subject. Based on the findings from these nine test runs, the ride time for the cyclist struck in this manner* at velocities between 15 and 30 mph (24 and 48 km/h) is, on the average, 1.3 seconds."

*"this manner" meaning cyclist headed in same direction as vehicle and breaking applied DURING impact. The statement below is when breaking is applied BEFORE impact.

"On run number two, where the brakes were applied before impact and the dummy had to travel both back and forth across the hood, the ride time was a high of 1.5 seconds. The majority of the ride times were 1.4 seconds in duration although some were as short as 1 .l seconds."


"D2. The “ride time”as used in this narrative is that period of time starting when the bumper of the striking vehicle impacts the tire of the bicycle and ending when the cyclist body strikes the ground."

This all happens really fast. The vehicle hits the bike and throws the rider and the rider has landed all in less than 1.5 seconds. The lights on mickeys bike tires are rubber. They slide through the spokes. They're easy to get on, not necessarily "easy" to get off. They don't shatter like plastic. Maybe impact was a little ahead of the truck where the misc/ unknown object seems to rest in the road, since studies show that loose object are usually found at area of impact, and the truck backed up.

If this camera is in fact like the traffic cameras this may very well be the only picture they have of the truck. Watch the cameras. One shot the vehicles are right there, the next frame, theyre 50+yards away. Thats a laps of WAY longer than 1.5 seconds. (when flooring it the Chevy Z71 goes 0-60 in 7.5 seconds) The driver may have thrown Mickey, bike,and belongings into the truck with the intention and/or promise of the quickest route to a hospital. They took the bike so it wouldn't be stolen. Somewhere along the way, the hospital went out of the window for narrsacistic self preservation.

If the camera is real time, then I wonder why they messed with the photo so much.

This of course is my own opinion. I am not a bicycle accident expert. I have read SO much on bicycle accident studies over the last six weeks it would make one sick. This study that I've quoted here is the most concise in terms of being consistent with the way Mickey would have hit. From behind. Maybe bike in motion, maybe not. It's really worth reading. The damage to the bike in the study is a bent rear wheel. There are photos in the study.

Just in case y'all missed it:

http://www.collisionsafety.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Bike-crash-trajectory-SAE-900368.pdf
 
I wish we at least knew what we are dealing with too. Should us local girls be scared for our lives? Or do we not have any reason to be scared? I just really wish we knew more

I haven't seen or heard anything that makes me think Mickey was a specific victim, personally. I think it was random and I would be sure not to be alone, especially after dark. But I would always be sure of that anyway...JMO
 
I'm getting aggravated with my phone!

Anyway, no evidence left behind. No screams heard or collision witnessed.(that's the kind of thing that makes dogs bark like crazy!) Moo but perp on foot theory accounts for a lot of things such as lack of evidence. Moo

I think your theory is a good one. Someone could have approached her and grabbed her backpack and she chased them. Another possibility is that she saw something happening, like someone being assaulted or mugged and she ran to help.
 
To be fair, under very different circumstances.
Does it matter what the circumstances are? Nobody knows that right now, yes she had a breakdown recently around finals time that was 2 weeks ago. Her Dr felt she was ok enough to release her for out patient care. Her parents or friends have no idea where she is at and i'm assuming if this were your child no matter the circumstances you would be beside yourself. Yes let's all hope she is just needing time to her self. My concern is, that is a rough area and i'm praying she did not come across someone or something that will harm her.

Sorry no dis-respect meant and i'm hoping that your comment got lost on me through text and you were not dismissing the situation.
 
Does it matter what the circumstances are? Nobody knows that right now, yes she had a breakdown recently around finals time that was 2 weeks ago. Her Dr felt she was ok enough to release her for out patient care. Her parents or friends have no idea where she is at and i'm assuming if this were your child no matter the circumstances you would be beside yourself. Yes let's all hope she is just needing time to her self. My concern is, that is a rough area and i'm praying she did not come across someone or something that will harm her.

Sorry no dis-respect meant and i'm hoping that your comment got lost on me through text and you were not dismissing the situation.

I just was seeing people starting to link her to Mickey...that was my point...
 
Does it matter what the circumstances are? Nobody knows that right now, yes she had a breakdown recently around finals time that was 2 weeks ago. Her Dr felt she was ok enough to release her for out patient care. Her parents or friends have no idea where she is at and i'm assuming if this were your child no matter the circumstances you would be beside yourself. Yes let's all hope she is just needing time to her self. My concern is, that is a rough area and i'm praying she did not come across someone or something that will harm her.

Sorry no dis-respect meant and i'm hoping that your comment got lost on me through text and you were not dismissing the situation.

I don't think Clu was dismissing the situation or being disrespectful. But in the Sacto case the young woman has apparently been spotted and has run away from anyone trying to help. She is distraught and in severe need of help, but it is, with all due respect, a different set of circumstances, and probably not connected to Mickey's case in any way. Jmo
 
I don't think Clu was dismissing the situation or being disrespectful. But in the Sacto case the young woman has apparently been spotted and has run away from anyone trying to help. She is distraught and in severe need of help, but it is, with all due respect, a different set of circumstances, and probably not connected to Mickey's case in any way. Jmo

Thank you, I think we share a brain sometimes...
 
You are comparing what we know about the TRAFFIC cameras to the SURVELIANCE cameras. We do not, in fact, know that the surveillance cameras take still shots. That camera may well be continuous video.
Also, LE and the family did not have great difficulty identifying Mickey in these stills. Once the stills were enhanced, her entire family recognized Mickey.

respectfully snipped..

I do in fact know the video is not continuous but exactly like the traffic cameras. That is what a representative of the planning commission told me. I posted her contact information here to corroborate that information and it was removed by moderators. I did not call and represent WS or my business.
Mods: I apologize for posting that if it was against TOS.

Ashley Says said. "It's her silhouette, her body type. You can see the lights on her spokes. I've looked at it really closely and when you look closely, you can even see that big blonde hair.

She saw her silhouette, her body type and had to look at it closely to see her big blonde hair... but easily identified her. ok.

That tells me they see exactly what we see... conclude that how you will.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
122
Guests online
1,875
Total visitors
1,997

Forum statistics

Threads
590,001
Messages
17,928,872
Members
228,037
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top