Hailey Dunn General Discussion #2

[StrayKat]

I just hope and pray for Justice for Hailey, Justice for her family, Justice for her friends, Justice for the searchers, and Justice for LE.

 

[Tugela]

LE have said NO sightings could be verified. I do agree LE are getting all their ducks in a row though. Justice for Hailey.

They said no sightings could be corroborated. Not quite the same thing.

LE do not assume an eye witness account is false unless proven true. The evidentiary value increases if it can be corroborated, but the evidentiary value does not disappear if it is not.

As I have pointed out repeatedly, in order to overcome these eye witness accounts in a court case, they would have to prove they are false, not just not be able to corroborate them.

It is all very well for a small town sheriff to make those claims (after all, this was the same sheriff that was claiming all sorts of child *advertiser censored*, which we now know to be false), but in a court case the prosecutor is going to have to prove the case. The defence does not have to prove anything, they just have to show reasonable doubt, which is what these witnesses will do. For that reason, unless LE can come up with compelling evidence that HD was dead the day before, or that the witnesses were wrong, their testimony will stand.

 

[For The Kids]

They said no sightings could be corroborated. Not quite the same thing.

LE do not assume an eye witness account is false unless proven true. The evidentiary value increases if it can be corroborated, but the evidentiary value does not disappear if it is not.

As I have pointed out repeatedly, in order to overcome these eye witness accounts in a court case, they would have to prove they are false, not just not be able to corroborate them.

It is all very well for a small town sheriff to make those claims (after all, this was the same sheriff that was claiming all sorts of child *advertiser censored*, which we now know to be false), but in a court case the prosecutor is going to have to prove the case. The defence does not have to prove anything, they just have to show reasonable doubt, which is what these witnesses will do. For that reason, unless LE can come up with compelling evidence that HD was dead the day before, or that the witnesses were wrong, their testimony will stand.

Firstly when was it confirmed that there was no child *advertiser censored* on Shawns moms computer? Billie said herself that LE had shown her some of the images and she didnt like it. Was she lieing? with Billie its possible I suppose. Tts also obvious that Shawn has a thing about photographs that aren't appropriate. Secondly I am sure that LE will be able to prove that the witnesses were wrong and more importantly I believe that the evidence will show that she died at her home. I believe that LE have far more evidence than you realise

 

[dannyodie]

this relationship of BD and SA sorta reminds me of a case from years back known as the " Ken and Barbie" killers where the girl friend then wife became involved in helping her husband get teenage girls for his own sick pleasure, some of which she took place in as well, even helped him have his way with her own teenage sister

 

[dannyodie]

LE vacuumed and collected evidence from the car. Maybe there is something unique about the soil from the area around Lake JB Johnson.

We just don't know what kind of evidence LE has. IMO, the FBI is playing this close to the vest because they want to build a solid case. It hasn't even been three months since her remains were found, forensics take time. At least that is what I keep telling myself ...

yes, there would be something unique about the soil at or near the lake, there would be types of soil and other organisms only unique to lake born areas in contrast to other locations in the area, so hopefully they not only have traces of soil samples, but trace samples of biological evidence as well, soil sample testing of small amounts would take some time as in some cases, the samples have been shipped to universities specializing in the field of soil forensics

 

[Frostess]

Notice the date of this article is March 21st. This states what was found on the computers.


http://bigcountryhomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=353726

Keep that in mind when I post the next link, which I believe is the link that Tugela is stating as proof of no child *advertiser censored*.

 

[Frostess]

Notice the date on this article is March 18th, 3 days before the official affidavit was released. It does NOT say that no *advertiser censored* was found on the computer. It only states that Toombs is not sure of what was found on the computer.

http://bigcountryhomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=353126

 

[Frostess]

Also, Billie admitted to being shown pics of beastiality and child *advertiser censored* that were found by LE.

http://bigcountryhomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=348556

Where are the links to disprove me???

 

[tlcya]

I see no new news is here.

 

[Knox]

I just edited my comment about it being opinions right before you posted this. LOL And I agree with what you said. Yes, I could ignore the comments because I know not to believe what they are saying, but others who are not following this case as closely will believe it if it's continuously stated as facts when it's not. Heck, I believed it when I first started coming to this forum. I thought that I had missed something important somewhere down the line, so yesterday I spent hours combing through the links to find where LE made a mistake about the *advertiser censored* and there isn't a single link about it that isn't people like us discussing it in forums. It simply a theory from people playing Devil's advocate.

Personally, I wonder if the *advertiser censored* opened a whole new and separate investigation, which has never even been publicly acknowledged by LE? What is the Texas Statute of Limitations for filing charges?

http://fox59.com/2013/04/10/former-...-*advertiser censored*-charges/#axzz2VwgQlOY4

 

[ahintexas]

Personally, I wonder if the *advertiser censored* opened a whole new and separate investigation, which has never even been publicly acknowledged by LE? What is the Texas Statute of Limitations for filing charges?

http://fox59.com/2013/04/10/former-...-*advertiser censored*-charges/#axzz2VwgQlOY4

I'm baffled by the entire "child *advertiser censored*" finding. You see/read on a daily basis where people are being arrested/sentenced for child *advertiser censored*. If in fact child *advertiser censored* was found, why no arrest? Why no indictments? I don't see a Texas DA just letting that go. Jmo

 

[Frostess]

Personally, I wonder if the *advertiser censored* opened a whole new and separate investigation, which has never even been publicly acknowledged by LE? What is the Texas Statute of Limitations for filing charges?

http://fox59.com/2013/04/10/former-...-*advertiser censored*-charges/#axzz2VwgQlOY4

I couldn't find anything about the statute of limitations, but I did find this link that explains what is considered criminal and I believe they have enough to press charges on him at any given point just on the child *advertiser censored*.

http://statelaws.findlaw.com/texas-law/texas-child-*advertiser censored*-laws.html

 

[Frostess]

I'm baffled by the entire "child *advertiser censored*" finding. You see/read on a daily basis where people are being arrested/sentenced for child *advertiser censored*. If in fact child *advertiser censored* was found, why no arrest? Why no indictments? I don't see a Texas DA just letting that go. Jmo

If any of the *advertiser censored* was in direct connection to Hailey, they would not bring charges on him for the child *advertiser censored* before her murder trial. They would want to use it as evidence in her case first and charge him with the lesser crime later or in conjunction with the murder trial. And for the record, some of the *advertiser censored* found in the home was made on a personal digital camera meaning some of it was made by someone living in the home, not just downloads from the internet.

 

[ahintexas]

I couldn't find anything about the statute of limitations, but I did find this link that explains what is considered criminal and I believe they have enough to press charges on him at any given point just on the child *advertiser censored*.

http://statelaws.findlaw.com/texas-law/texas-child-*advertiser censored*-laws.html

There is no SOL on Federal charges, not sure about state.

 

[Frostess]

Notice the date of this article is March 21st. This states what was found on the computers.


http://bigcountryhomepage.com/fulltext?nxd_id=353726

Keep that in mind when I post the next link, which I believe is the link that Tugela is stating as proof of no child *advertiser censored*.

"The affidavit notes that some pornographic images were retrieved from the memory stick and cell phone owned by Adkins were made with a Kodak Easy Share camera."

 

[For The Kids]

"The affidavit notes that some pornographic images were retrieved from the memory stick and cell phone owned by Adkins were made with a Kodak Easy Share camera."

Wasn't some of the pornographic images Shawn and Billie though? maybe Shawn and another woman too though Im not sure about that.

 

[StrayKat]

As the story originally said "depicted"... no, take that back. That was after the 2nd editing that morning. If those pictures included anything involving Hailey the info would have never been released. I actually enjoy Tugela's comments.

 

[sreshowtime]

http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2011-title18/pdf/USCODE-2011-title18-partII-chap213-sec3299.pdf

18 U.S.C. 3299 pg. 680

to the best of my understanding there is no statute of limitations for federal prosecution on child *advertiser censored*

...back up?

 

[Knox]

As the story originally said "depicted"... no, take that back. That was after the 2nd editing that morning. If those pictures included anything involving Hailey the info would have never been released. I actually enjoy Tugela's comments.

Oh yes, me too!!!

Thanks for the info sres, if there is no Federal SOL; doesn't shoot my theory completely out of the water then. :seeya:

 

[For The Kids]

As the story originally said "depicted"... no, take that back. That was after the 2nd editing that morning. If those pictures included anything involving Hailey the info would have never been released. I actually enjoy Tugela's comments.

I don't really understand your first sentence but I thought LE had said that Hailey wasn't in any of the pictures. Then again they probably wouldn't tell us if she was. As for liking Tugelas comments we all have favorite posters