CA - Joey, Summer, Gianni, Joseph Jr McStay Murders - Feb 4th 2010 #17

[missy1974]

My personal thoughts? I do think the Trooper was seen in the High Desert area. Just very strange. Why the ad was written is anybody's guess.

ETA: driven by CM and ?????
CMs sister testified something to the effect CM would have to drive Bennet around. I thought maybe we were going to touch on the Craigslist ads after her testimony.

Interesting...

I wonder if LE even looked into the Craigslist ad? I hope some day we will have more of the documents for this case. I would love to read all the interviews myself, all the evidence that wasn't allowed in, all of the hearings that were held before trial. It's too bad the laws in California are not the same as other States where we would have already had them. Another reason I will try to avoid the next California trial lol

 

[travelbug]

d

 

[wary]

His location following the disappearance makes little difference. The evidence presented that he purchased the tickets on 2/6 and didn't leave until 2/7/10 is significant.

Are you sure those dates are right?

 

[missingm]

I'm not saying he was or he wasn't in Hawaii... I have no clue... neither does anyone else here IMO

By saying that no one else has a clue even though we have seen debit card transactions, ip address, and other testimony is fairly dismissive, imo. And yes, I firmly believe that DK was in Hawaii because that is where all of the evidence points and all I see is a bad Google lookup on an IP (which has been refuted) to suggest otherwise. Is there some other evidence that anyone can point me to?

 

[missy1974]

By saying that no one else has a clue even though we have seen debit card transactions, ip address, and other testimony is fairly dismissive, imo. And yes, I firmly believe that DK was in Hawaii because that is where all of the evidence points and all I see is a bad Google lookup on an IP (which has been refuted) to suggest otherwise. Is there some other evidence that anyone can point me to?

Your opinion, or belief is that he was there. IMO it hasn't been proven. It's okay to have differing opinions. And it's okay for me to believe that no one here knows 100% that Dan was or was not in Hawaii.

If this is all the proof anyone needs to prove they were or weren't somewhere... we could all plan the perfect alibi's for a crime IMO Which I may need some day with my google search history

 

[Tortoise]

Are you sure those dates are right?

No, it's incorrect information.

 

[wary]

No, it's incorrect information.

Off by a whole month, right?

 

[Tortoise]

Off by a whole month, right?

Right.

 

[asyousay]

Your opinion, or belief is that he was there. IMO it hasn't been proven. It's okay to have differing opinions. And it's okay for me to believe that no one here knows 100% that Dan was or was not in Hawaii.

If this is all the proof anyone needs to prove they were or weren't somewhere... we could all plan the perfect alibi's for a crime IMO Which I may need some day with my google search history

So what would make you believe he was in Hawaii ?

 

[thelmadawg]

So if DK owned the domain name, seems to me he could sell the domain name. Also, he had a PayPal debit card and seemed to be an authorized user of the PayPal account (let me know if that is incorrect). Still don't see what was illegal.....

MM, I don't think we have the answers to any of this, because it apparently was never investigated, nor were any legal actions taken by the family against DK for any possible fraudulent actions that may have occurred - that is as far as we know.

 

[missy1974]

So what would make you believe he was in Hawaii ?

It's not about what I believe... it's about what has been proven to me IMO I can believe he was there and still think it was not actually proven to be true. I can also believe he was in San Diego and still think he didn't kill them too.

I will wait to see what the State does in rebuttal, if anything. If they choose do nothing, then I think it leaves some doubt there IMO

 

[asyousay]

It's not about what I believe... it's about what has been proven to me IMO I can believe he was there and still think it was not actually proven to be true. I can also believe he was in San Diego and still think he didn't kill them too.

I will wait to see what the State does in rebuttal, if anything. If they choose do nothing, then I think it leaves some doubt there IMO

Ok — Let me rephrase the question for you

What do the prosecution have to do to convince you he was in Hawaii?

You have seen card transactions, you have heard about the plane reservations and anything else I have forgotten. It seems pretty conclusive unless you want photographic proof?

 

[thelmadawg]

I'm talking conviction as in BARD, a threshold standard way above the required 'probable cause' needed for bringing a case to trial. IMO, the sad issue with this case is it appears there wasn't even enough evidence to meet the 'probable cause' standard until the SBDA manipulated the evidence to fit their agenda. I believe that CM will one day receive a large cash settlement compensating him for his time in custody. Perhaps, one day if I happen to run into him at the poker tables I'll have some of that money.

Be careful what you wish for - lol

 

[mrjitty]

This is where evidential burden matters

To create reasonable doubt re Dan, the defence have to establish a base line of facts which raise a real possibility Dan did the murders. If there is a real and non fanciful possibility Dan did the murders, obviously Chase cannot be found guilty. So far so good.

A possibility Dan was in California on 4 Feb 2010, without anything else, is not a real possibility Dan did the murders.

i.e. pointing to speculative reasons why Dan was somehow in Cali is not raising reasonable doubt.

 

[missy1974]

Ok — Let me rephrase the question for you

What do the prosecution have to do to convince you he was in Hawaii?

You have seen card transactions, you have heard about the plane reservations and anything else I have forgotten. It seems pretty conclusive unless you want photographic proof?

BBM - not really sure how to answer that asyousay because you are assuming I don't believe it LOL

ETA: There are people that still believe that Dan did this, there are people that believe that Dan wasn't in Hawaii... if I am answering for them, I would still have to say I don't know.... maybe those that read here and want to post their beliefs will answer what it would take to convince them

 

[Mony Mony]

Off by a whole month, right?

That's what I thought. I was listening to testimony again to see if I heard wrong!

 

[Texas Red]

A possibility Dan was in California on 4 Feb 2010, without anything else, is not a real possibility Dan did the murders.

I agree, the fact that DK being in California is in itself not evidence of guilt. However, the fact that he had lied about it for the purpose of creating a false alibi is evidence of guilt.

 

[Texas Red]

Ok — Let me rephrase the question for you

What do the prosecution have to do to convince you he was in Hawaii?

You have seen card transactions, you have heard about the plane reservations and anything else I have forgotten. It seems pretty conclusive unless you want photographic proof?

A flight manifest would go a long way in convincing me.

 

[oceanblueeyes]

A piece of paper - or document - that is accepted by the court into evidence. The prosecution isn't required to show ping info because Dan isn't a defendant.

Dan is probably 5'11-6', he's not small. Not that it matters.

I want to see the defense teams proof he wasn't in Hawaii. After all they are the ones making those claims.

Imo, so far they havent even come close to proving he wasnt where his records show he was. They need to man up, and call Dan the man himself. Not one thing is stopping them from doing just that.

Btw, has the defense produced an iron clad alibi for CM, backed up with records for the defendant yet? Does he have documentation like Dan does?

Was he running around town on the 4th using his credit card or writing one of his ISF checks showing his own locations, and businesses or casinos he went to on the 4th, since he sure seemed to have been out of pocket that day?

I'm sure he was quite busy that day so surely someone can give him an iron glad alibi he so desperately needs when they saw him out, and about that day.

He is so memorable ya know! Just ask him, he thinks no one would ever forget meeting the old faux cowboy!

Imo

 

[Frankie Hellis]

I'm talking conviction as in BARD, a threshold standard way above the required 'probable cause' needed for bringing a case to trial. IMO, the sad issue with this case is it appears there wasn't even enough evidence to meet the 'probable cause' standard until the SBDA manipulated the evidence to fit their agenda. I believe that CM will one day receive a large cash settlement compensating him for his time in custody. Perhaps, one day if I happen to run into him at the poker tables I'll have some of that money.

What evidence do you believe was manipulated? I am genuinely curious.