Discussion in 'Missing Persons Discussion' started by Mysti88c, May 12, 2020.
I'm going to have to agree with you. Absolutely. IMO.
Live chat after show:
Chris was the most cynical & vocal regarding Barry's guilt on PE. Mike frequently had to reign him in, JMO. So I agree, calling him and asking him "how he could help" was pretty fake. I was confused for a moment because initially, it sounded like the call was pre-arranged?
I also totally agree with you. Not sure why he referred to himself as a/the You Tube guy... It just didn't seem authentic. I can't put my finger on it.
My impression was that he knew Barry would hang up on him immediately if he had said he was from PE. They've always said they suspect he watches their streams. I think that's why he only identified himself as Chris.
According to MK @ProfilingEvil and Lauren Scharf, the home is currently up for sale as well as listed on AirBnB. They both answered in the affirmative on PE’s last YouTube video. I don’t remember what minute mark. I apologize in advance
IMO, the show was about Trust, expert guests and all on the subject. Then the host, CM, starts off his random call with BM in a non-upfront, clear way. It was sneaky & shady.
He deserved to be hung up on. IMO
MOO and only moo, not meaning to be hard on CM. I thought the call was very much less than professional, disingenuous, & dishonest. Why didn’t CM give his full name & introduce himself in the beginning of the call. 2nd pt for me that feels disingenuous was CM says “I called because I know you were passing out flyers, how can I help?” I know LE have every right to use tactics when getting a poi to talk, but the call kind of left me feeling like I needed a shower!
Hoping 2021 is a better year for everyone.
I’m not sure what I think. On one hand, BM thinks he has been burned by you tubers, so I can understand the mistrust, BUT if my hubby were missing (and I was innocent) I would like to think that I would be BEGGING for the media in whatever fashion. It’s been months now and she needs to be found. She definitely doesn’t need to be forgotten. JMO.
exactly! if i were a suspect and someone called me and identified themself as from a show called Profiling Evil, i’d hang up lol
LE Holdbacks. Why?
Thx for your post @OldCop sbm bbm
@Minordetails What OldCop said ^.
When a perp knows LE knows a fact, perp can acknowledge it and weave it right into what he tells LE. And it's not just perps who try to craft their stories to mesh w publicly known facts.
Sometimes others who have learned a relevant fact can use that info to modify their versions of events to mislead LE in interviews. The others may be co-conspirators, aiders, abettors who would be implicated in the crime themselves. Others may simply be perp's friends or relatives who are unaware of his criminal actions but who want to help prevent his arrest or conviction. my2cts.
Eta: not addressing this particular case, just referring to LE policy re releasing findings from investigation.
The call to BM was a “hook” to get new listeners to sign up for his YouTube channel. He did it to attract a new audience, similar to a carnival barker. SM deserves more than that.
I pray there’s a break soon.
i’d argue that he’s keeping her name alive. his intentions are good, even if bilateral IMO
we still all found it interesting to hear BM. even if it was a nothing burger
This is why I do not think that failure to disclose facts in some investigations is just pettiness:
Since you brought up the helmet as an example, let’s suppose, as a hypothetical, that LE discovered SM’s helmet off the road on Hwy 50 just past the intersection of 225. Let’s also suppose that LE, for whatever reason, felt that the helmet had been planted in that location after the fact.
LE does not say that they have found the helmet, but they do say they found a “personal item” that they believe is connected to the case. If I was the perpetrator, I would be extremely curious as to what they found. Did they find the helmet that I planted? Did I drop something at the scene? Maybe I should go and take a look to see if the helmet is still there. Maybe LE put a trail cam at the location...... Not petty in my opinion. Just another investigative tool.
LE has no obligation to release evidence to the public during an active investigation. You really want to know what LE knows, but you do not have a right to know it. In a good disciplined LE organization, investigators do not even share information with other personnel who are not working on that particular case. This doctrine is called “Need to Know” vs right to know. A LE officer may have a right to know certain classified information based on their status in the agency. However, if they are not working on that particular case they probably do not have a Need to Know. Refusal to share information with a fellow officer can often cause resentment; much as you consider it to be petty.
With all the talk of GD, FF's and the bike it gave me a thought: Was there anything to the mentioning of BM being in training? Was that BM who mentioned it? I tried searching back and cannot find much reference to the training.
IIR it was TN who first mentioned the training. It was never clear if BM told him that or he assumed it. It then kind of took on a life of it’s own and was mentioned in several articles that that’s why BM was out of town on MD. This was kind of debunked when the Fire Chief stated that he had no knowledge of any scheduled training that day. Most classes had been cancelled because of Covid. This then devolved into “BM lied about where he was that day”.
Thank you. Do we know if anyone else mentioned the training?
LE Holdbacks. Inconsequential Detail?
@Minordetails (what a great username) bbm sbm Not to beat a dead horse here, but thought of another point about why LE generally does not publicly release (much) info pre-trial, not like they did 50, 25, 10 yrs ago. True (generally) in the big cities and small towns.
Your hotel-reservation-time example is one mere teensy, tiny, little, bitty factoid LE could release. I'd bet LE has hundreds (thousands?) plus seemingly inconsequential bits of info in this case. Would also bet, if released to the public pre-trial, not a single one in and of itself would be fatal to prosecution's case.
If LE's investigation had uncovered a couple video recordings from phones & security cams and had ten upstanding citizen eye witnesses willing to testify to seeing perp shoot woman in head five times and bury her, LE & prosecutor would have direct evidence juries like to see & hear to convict. Not happening here.
If/when Prosecutor proceeds, case will tie together hundreds of ^ pieces of circumstantial evd --- like hotel reservation time --- to make the case in SM's death against whoever is responsible. A classic closing argument by prosecutors compares circumstantial evd to many pebbles piling up until their weight proves the defendant's guilt.
There's little or no reason for LE or prosecutor to publicly release such info* pre-trial. Doing that might allow those evidentiary pebbles to be washed away and result in a not-guilty verdict. my2cts.
* Prosecution is compelled to give certain & evd to defense team to ensure def. an opportunity to present a defense.
When somebody calls stating they are hear to help find your wife, your first thought should not be " sorry i can't trust you" it should be how can you help?!?!. I can understand some level of distrust considering 99% of people think he is guilty but he took zero initiative to find out if the person was in anyway genuine, They said they were here to help, they could have had vital new information about his missing wife or new vital information proving him innocent. He has ZERO interest in even hearing what Chris had to say. HUGE red flag.