Found Deceased AL - Paighton Houston, 29, left bar with 2 men, Birmingham, 20 Dec 2019 #5

Status
Not open for further replies.
What I find rather striking in this case that you always *always* see in other cases, is the lack of media about FH.
There have been zero interviews with friends, family, kids, wives, ex-wives, co-workers, ex-coworkers, neighbors or fame-seekers masquerading as any of the above.
We don't know where or if he works/worked, we don't know what kind of car he has, or if he even has one, and we don't really have a clue where he is.
There is almost nothing about him in the media except he's an ex-con wanted for a bizarre charge associated with poor Paighton being buried at his relative's abandoned house.

Where are all his friends, family, etc., and where is the media? It really seems bizarre they aren't really digging around on this case.

FH spent most of his adult life in prison. Seems to me he likely visited family when they were not home -- using their yard to hide his wrongdoing. I don't think this is the kind of suspect who's family would be willing to go on camera or be quoted in newsprint. Nobody waiting in line to speak of his upstanding character.

I've no doubt that FH will be apprehended. I believe investigators are using their best source similar to what led them to FH to begin with -- a trusted informant.

MOO
 
Have you actually read how the system works? The identity of the caller/tipster is encrypted. The person accepting the tip is not LE and does not know their identity. The phone lines don't have caller ID. The entire system is set up to ensure the person is anonymous and is not directly in contact with LE. What you're suggesting is completely at odds with how the system is organized. How can they pass on information to LE that, by design, they do not have?

Yes, I have. My reply was about criminals calling in tips about their own crimes and making cash off it that another poster or posters were speaking about. It is not anonymous if they pick the date, time, and location of bank. If a caller places a tip where to find a body. There is no doubt handcuffs, many, dressed as bank employees or customers will be there arresting a suspect. If a caller is supected and does not choose money and the crime is serious enough, a warrant or another way warranted could definitely overrule this group's general rule in specialized circumstances, imo. Specialized= urgency, child victims, premeditated murders and terrorist activities.

I do not believe most things promised, there is always small print that is there but not there, somewhere hidden, imo.

Crime Stoppers:
In the meantime, we pass your anonymous information onto the appropriate law enforcement agency, which takes action based on your information and reports back to us on whether it led to the solving or prevention of a crime.

When you call us back and give us your code number, we check with law enforcement to see whether your information was useful. If it was, you receive a cash reward.

To receive that reward, we instruct you to go to a designated bank at a specified location on a certain date to pick up your reward. Rewards are paid out in cash, no matter what the amount.
 
Yes, I have. My reply was about criminals calling in tips about their own crimes and making cash off it that another poster or posters were speaking about. It is not anonymous if they pick the date, time, and location of bank. If a caller places a tip where to find a body. There is no doubt handcuffs, many, dressed as bank employees or customers will be there arresting a suspect. If a caller is supected and does not choose money and the crime is serious enough, a warrant or another way warranted could definitely overrule this group's general rule in specialized circumstances, imo. Specialized= urgency, child victims, premeditated murders and terrorist activities.

I do not believe most things promised, there is always small print that is there but not there, somewhere hidden, imo.

Crime Stoppers:
In the meantime, we pass your anonymous information onto the appropriate law enforcement agency, which takes action based on your information and reports back to us on whether it led to the solving or prevention of a crime.

When you call us back and give us your code number, we check with law enforcement to see whether your information was useful. If it was, you receive a cash reward.

To receive that reward, we instruct you to go to a designated bank at a specified location on a certain date to pick up your reward. Rewards are paid out in cash, no matter what the amount.
This entire scenario you propose presupposes CrimeStoppers is sharing the information about the bank with LE, which again contradicts their stated purpose of allowing people to share information without repercussion. I don't think it would take too many of these theoretical arrests at banks to tip people off that CrimeStoppers is lying about anonymity, which would kill the entire program.

Do you have any MSM source substantiating your claim that CrimeStoppers does this? Of someone complaining about the organization lying about what it does? Because the person who would report their own crime to cash in on it would also sing like a canary about being "tricked" like this.
 
This entire scenario you propose presupposes CrimeStoppers is sharing the information about the bank with LE, which again contradicts their stated purpose of allowing people to share information without repercussion. I don't think it would take too many of these theoretical arrests at banks to tip people off that CrimeStoppers is lying about anonymity, which would kill the entire program.

Do you have any MSM source substantiating your claim that CrimeStoppers does this? Of someone complaining about the organization lying about what it does?

Perhaps killers and terrorists are not calling in and confessing about their crimes with only info, the guilty would know. That is what my reply was about, and this was mentioned in the one or more posts, I replied in response to.

I am not too sure why special circumstances and my opinion in general, and about a highly unlikely event leading to circumvental issues, of privacy rights in regards to specific urgent cases, is one to argue about.

I am sure it is anonymous most times, meaning, a majority of the time. It is still my opinion, for myself, i do not trust anonimity in regards to crime and other promises, just a personal opinion and belief of mine. I am not attempting to be right from someone saying I am wrong, not one to care about these thing, simply, stating my beliefs.
 
Bumping Tricia's post from another thread.

HEY EVERYONE,
WE NEED YOUR HELP! IT'S FREE AND TAKES JUST A FEW SECONDS!
CLICK HERE AND SUBSCRIBE TO THE WEBSLEUTHS YOUTUBE CHANNEL!

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TXf5vfAv8k
We are past the halfway mark. We need 1000 subscribers before we can go live with something called "Smart Chat". Using Smart Chat to broadcast live will help Websleuths continue to operate.
Right now at Websleuths youtube, we have the latest Websleuths Radio Podcast with Leigh Egan from Crimeoneline.com Leigh updates us on the Heidi Broussard case, Paighton Houston and so much more.
Click on the link and hit the "Subscribe" button and help Websleuths.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=4TXf5vfAv8k

Thank you,
Tricia
 
Perhaps killers and terrorists are not calling in and confessing about their crimes with only info, the guilty would know. That is what my reply was about, and this was mentioned in the one or more posts, I replied in response to.

I am not too sure why special circumstances and my opinion in general, and about a highly unlikely event leading to circumvental issues, of privacy rights in regards to specific urgent cases, is one to argue about.

I am sure it is anonymous most times, meaning, a majority of the time. It is still my opinion, for myself, i do not trust anonimity in regards to crime and other promises, just a personal opinion and belief of mine. I am not attempting to be right from someone saying I am wrong, not one to care about these thing, simply, stating my beliefs.
Thanks for clarifying. It seems you have your own personal paranoia with trusting in such programs, which is certainly your prerogative.

I tend to believe that the program continues to work because there is no small print. Information known only by a killer or perpetrator would be great info for investigators to have, even if they were unable to make an arrest then or be told where it came from. It would certainly be another tool toward finding that out on their own, though, which is ultimately the point. LE tends to appreciate crimestoppers for that reason. They don't see it necessary, likely, to know where the info came from but rather are grateful for the information at all. Moo
 
Perhaps killers and terrorists are not calling in and confessing about their crimes with only info, the guilty would know. That is what my reply was about, and this was mentioned in the one or more posts, I replied in response to.

I am not too sure why special circumstances and my opinion in general, and about a highly unlikely event leading to circumvental issues, of privacy rights in regards to specific urgent cases, is one to argue about.

I am sure it is anonymous most times, meaning, a majority of the time. It is still my opinion, for myself, i do not trust anonimity in regards to crime and other promises, just a personal opinion and belief of mine. I am not attempting to be right from someone saying I am wrong, not one to care about these thing, simply, stating my beliefs.
Thanks for clarifying--I sincerely was not trying to be argumentative and apologize if I came across that way. I was just trying to understand where you were coming from. I tend to view the organization more from @Momma2cam's perspective in that it works because they do honor the commitment to anonymity, even if they'd be genuinely curious to know who was providing the info.
 
You’re Not a Drug Dealer? Here’s Why the Police Might Disagree
People who thought they were just partying when someone else overdosed can find themselves charged with murder.

By Rosa Goldensohn
May 25, 2018

My friend accidentally overdosed and died. Is that my fault?
Legally speaking, it can be. If you supplied the drugs or helped obtain them, you could be considered a drug dealer, held responsible for the death and go to prison.

Let’s say you bring illegal drugs to a party, as this 21-year-old in Minnesota did, and something terrible happens, like 10 people falling ill and one — his best friend — dying. He was convicted of third-degree murder and sentenced to nearly 10 years.

Even if you’re mistaken about what exactly you’ve given someone, you can get in serious trouble, like this 17-year-old. He and two classmates faced murder charges when he sold a drug he thought was LSD to his closest friend, who overdosed. His defense lawyer argued that he was the captain of the football team, a straight-A student, and this was the “sole time” he had been involved with drugs, but the prosecutor said the evidence, including text messages, was “damning.” The three were allowed to plead guilty to distribution, a less serious charge, but still a felony.

Unlike child endangerment or “social host” laws that hold parents responsible for underage drinking or drug use, these cases can make you criminally liable for the actions of your peers or people older than you.

I shared drugs with my friends at a party. How does that make me a dealer?
State laws vary, but drug “distribution” or “delivery” is generally not limited to selling. It can include sharing drugs, giving them away, or having a friend pay you back for drugs you bought.

What if I didn’t give my friend the drugs or touch any money?
It depends on the circumstances. Our article takes a close look at Nick Klamer and Chase Thistle, two friends in rural, blue-collar Wisconsin. Nick asked his dad if he could borrow $200, claiming it was needed for an emergency car repair, but the two friends used the money to buy drugs. Nick, 26, died and Chase, now 29, was prosecuted.

Chase may not have touched the money, but he used Facebook Messenger to arrange the deal, making him a “party to a crime,” which legally speaking is the same as actually committing the crime. He is serving three years for reckless homicide.

But I didn’t force my friend to take the drugs. In fact, I wasn’t even there.
Prosecutors often see overdoses from the point of view of the victims’ families, some of whom say that even if no one meant for anyone to die, without the drugs their loved ones would still be alive.

“Some family has lost an innocent life,” said Peter Kilmartin, the attorney general of Rhode Island, who proposed a mandatory life sentence in drug homicide cases. “That victim no longer has a voice.”

Providing or helping someone get a drug illegally puts you on shaky ground for everything that happens later. Legally, there is a difference between that and, say, a store selling alcohol to a 21-year-old who drank too much and died, because the sale itself was not unlawful.

So I think a friend may be overdosing. Should I call 911?
Of course you should call for help when someone is in distress. There are Good Samaritan laws in many states that protect you from charges like drug possession in those circumstances. But if you were involved in procuring the drugs, you would probably not be protected from being charged with manslaughter, reckless homicide or murder. According to the Drug Policy Alliance, the only states that provide that kind of immunity are Vermont and Delaware.

In several cases we looked at, the person who ended up being charged had tried to save the overdosing person by calling 911, administering C.P.R. or giving naloxone, an overdose-reversing drug. Critics say that prosecuting those people will make others afraid to call for help.

You’re Not a Drug Dealer? Here’s Why the Police Might Disagree
I already had a post removed for posting a most comprehensive story of something like this happening to people I know. I had included a link and that went poof, too. So, the Reader’s Digest version.

In AZ, this father and two sons bought what they thought was oxy to celebrate Christmas with. They took it, the father and one son died. The other lived. Turned out the oxy had fentanyl in it. The dealer was arrested, went to trial and was convicted of murder.
 
It doesn’t seem like they’re searching for him as much as waiting for him to show up. Maybe I’m missing something.
I don’t think they are. He’s probably in a data base in case some LE eventually runs in to him. The days of John Dillinger, Bonnie & Clyde as Public Enemy #1 is over. IMO
 
I already had a post removed for posting a most comprehensive story of something like this happening to people I know. I had included a link and that went poof, too. So, the Reader’s Digest version.

In AZ, this father and two sons bought what they thought was oxy to celebrate Christmas with. They took it, the father and one son died. The other lived. Turned out the oxy had fentanyl in it. The dealer was arrested, went to trial and was convicted of murder.

Thank you. I trust these posts and/or references about felony murder charges for helping acquire or distribute illicit drugs are viewed in relationship to the applicable state of Alabama as one in a handful to prosecute. Also goes to the motive of a suspect burying a victim if drugs become part of the facts of a case. MOO
 
Perhaps killers and terrorists are not calling in and confessing about their crimes with only info, the guilty would know. That is what my reply was about, and this was mentioned in the one or more posts, I replied in response to.

I am not too sure why special circumstances and my opinion in general, and about a highly unlikely event leading to circumvental issues, of privacy rights in regards to specific urgent cases, is one to argue about.

I am sure it is anonymous most times, meaning, a majority of the time. It is still my opinion, for myself, i do not trust anonimity in regards to crime and other promises, just a personal opinion and belief of mine. I am not attempting to be right from someone saying I am wrong, not one to care about these thing, simply, stating my beliefs.
Yes I brought this possibility up a little back and I still hold some suspicion that FH was the one that made the call, mostly on the info we do know right now, and that is, he is the only one charged with abuse of a corpse, and assuming he then is the only one who knew where he had buried PH. It would also make sense out of why they said “right now we have more questions than answers” when they first discovered PH.
Aside from the timing of the call and his skipping town, I keep going back to the purpose of the PC and letting the public know he has been charged and is MIA. I’ve concluded that PC wasn’t for the public but that LE was directly speaking to FH. They seem to appeal to him to turn himself in and then say he may return as if they know he has another reason to return. Then, there seems to be an abundance of mentioning crime stoppers in this case. In most cases we here please call and there has been so many numbers of calls. But this case we have heard several times now how tips led them to the body and more specifically “someone will get paid” that struck me. It’s as if they r telling FH he did the right thing.
Now, if he did make an anonymous call I do believe crime-stoppers keeps that anonymous. However, that does not mean that he did not sing, brag, or simply tell others in his circle he intends to collect. It really is amazing sometimes what money can drive people to do.

JMO
 
I don't think FH was probably all that calculated in his actions. I can ponder several reasons besides just the fact that someone in his presence died, that he panicked. As previously stated, I think he should still be in prison for his previous crimes, and I don't think that predators can be rehabilitated.If FH and PH had any physical contact, I think he may have considered that he would be charged with something due to his history. I have no idea if that is the case, or not. I don't buy into all of the way out there, theories about what ever happened having been some elaborate plot. Most things fall back to the simplest possibility. I have no doubt that FH and possibly others made some bad decisions that day, but at this point, I am not sure that anyone killed PH. That being said, the apprehension of FH is probably not a priority for LE as compared to other cases they are dealing with at present. He will turn up, probably pulled over for a signal out or some such minor offence. If and when he is convicted of something, it will most likely be a let down for those invested in this case. What we will probably learn from all of this is that drugs kill. It is a sad situation and my heart goes out to her family. A families unconditional love and willingness to believe in someone is real and true, but that is not always the best medicine when dealing with addiction. An acute sense of suspicion should always be present in those trying to help a recovering addict. Sometimes when we love someone, we just have to call them on their BS, no matter how much we would like to believe that they are doing the right thing.
 
I don't think FH was probably all that calculated in his actions. I can ponder several reasons besides just the fact that someone in his presence died, that he panicked. As previously stated, I think he should still be in prison for his previous crimes, and I don't think that predators can be rehabilitated.If FH and PH had any physical contact, I think he may have considered that he would be charged with something due to his history. I have no idea if that is the case, or not. I don't buy into all of the way out there, theories about what ever happened having been some elaborate plot. Most things fall back to the simplest possibility. I have no doubt that FH and possibly others made some bad decisions that day, but at this point, I am not sure that anyone killed PH. That being said, the apprehension of FH is probably not a priority for LE as compared to other cases they are dealing with at present. He will turn up, probably pulled over for a signal out or some such minor offence. If and when he is convicted of something, it will most likely be a let down for those invested in this case. What we will probably learn from all of this is that drugs kill. It is a sad situation and my heart goes out to her family. A families unconditional love and willingness to believe in someone is real and true, but that is not always the best medicine when dealing with addiction. An acute sense of suspicion should always be present in those trying to help a recovering addict. Sometimes when we love someone, we just have to call them on their BS, no matter how much we would like to believe that they are doing the right thing.
WRT rehabilitation- I wonder who is more likely to rehabilitate? A heroin addict or a rapist? Is there such thing as a recovering rapist?
 
WRT rehabilitation- I wonder who is more likely to rehabilitate? A heroin addict or a rapist? Is there such thing as a recovering rapist?

Personally, I don't think a rapist, pedo, predator of any kind can me rehabilitated. Not any more than a serial killer can be.
There is something inherently wrong in the their DNA.
 
Personally, I don't think a rapist, pedo, predator of any kind can me rehabilitated. Not any more than a serial killer can be.
There is something inherently wrong in the their DNA.
ITA so I am wondering why then so many believe it was the temptation of a recovering heroin addict that prevailed in this case over the temptation of a rapist?
Why then have I learned everything I thought I could possibly ever want to know about heroin users, dealers, and donators in this case and very little about the actions, crimes, and laws pertaining to a rapist?
 
Thank you. I trust these posts and/or references about felony murder charges for helping acquire or distribute illicit drugs are viewed in relationship to the applicable state of Alabama as one in a handful to prosecute. Also goes to the motive of a suspect burying a victim if drugs become part of the facts of a case. MOO
Exactly @Seattle. It definitely goes to motive of why he may not have called 911 if she overdosed and why he would bury her once she died instead of calling to report a death. More and more states seem to be following suit. IMO
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
203
Guests online
3,573
Total visitors
3,776

Forum statistics

Threads
592,308
Messages
17,967,112
Members
228,739
Latest member
eagerhuntress
Back
Top