MA - Vanessa Marcotte, 27, murdered, Princeton, 7 Aug 2016 #4

[compassionate]

Inthedetails, you are clear, cogent, courteous and i hope you stay

 

[Kickoff61]

Inthedetails, you are clear, cogent, courteous and i hope you stay

I agree, it would be good to have inthedetails ..stay.

 

[Kickoff61]

It appears this killer has been involved in crime before and yet not been caught. Therefore, thinking they are 'above the law' which explains the blatant act in broad daylight. This dangerous individual must be stopped and anyone with information will hopefully provide it.

 

[Kickoff61]

Completely agree, thank you

You are welcome.

 

[Rocky1]

A couple things.

One just because her dad said she had no relationships and the police said they have nothing bad 1-2 days after the murder. Realistically the police would still be limited in their collective information at this point, and while what they stated might have been true at the time it was spoken, i think it's reasonable to assume the wealth of knowledge police had at the 36-48 hr mark is far more substantial now then it was then.

My point is, I don't think we should hang out hats on those comments ruling in or out anything, it was simply too early in the investigation.

<modsnip>

The op asked a question about if VM had a boyfriend. I answered the op with a substantiated response from a MSM news clip.
Do you have a substantiated news clip that police have more information on the subject, or is that an unsubstantiated rumor?
<modsnip>

 

[Mskin]

I think the question is to the moderators.. Can events in the police blotter and media reports, whether seemingly related or not, be presented for the sake of discussion?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Kickoff61]

Trying to instigate arguments in here , is disruptive and not helpful to the case.

 

[Forager]

Quoting 1306kayaker
Great map - thanks for making!

At one point it was reported that LE found and removed evidence from the woods 1/2 mile south of her body. The original link no longer contains this info but just want to give you the option of adding it.

Somewhat interesting - 1/2 mile south of her body is in the vicinity of Sam Cobb Lane and, at 10:43 pm on Sunday night, there was a call reported in the Landmark police log of something in the woods on Sam Cobb Lane. It was probably just the police but LE didn't find evidence in this vicinity until Thursday.

Its possible they didn't find evidence their until later because it would have been dark searching around the woods at quarter of 11 at night, and when they expanded their search during daylight hours they obviously had better visibility.

That said though, I do remember reports of them searching down that part of the road, but no reports of them every finding anything. The only evidence I remember them finding after she was found was whatever was carried out in the brown paper bag near the crime scene.

Thanks, I've now added that to the map, quoting your post in the little map marker text box. I confess to being a little confused about it means and would be grateful for any further context you can offer. That was Sunday night of Aug 7, the day of the murder, right?. You mention, Kayaker, that "LE didn't find evidence in this vicinity until Thursday". Are you suggesting that the did, indeed, find something of interest there on Thursday? Here's the link to the map.

 

[Kickoff61]

I thank Law Enforcement for stopping the media for now so inappropriate speculation or misinterpreted facts do not impact the case negatively.

 

[rosesfromangels]

My goodness we have a lively thread going with lots of great ideas, and people testing each others thinking. This is great, this is how we get to some good hypotheses. Thank you everyone for all these stimulating theories and information! I'm trying to stay data focused and draw conclusions from what we do know, but I keep having all these niggling instincts...which can often prove wrong. We all have our own frame of reference, but collectively we can come up with a good theory.

I'm having trouble shaking the impression of a young,maladjusted deviant neighbor. But I don't have anything data wise to support that impression. Arrrgh!

 

[Kickoff61]

This below: was already posted before . Any questions can be directed to this person.

tlcya

• View Profile
• View Forum Posts
• View Blog Entries

WS Administrator

Join DateOct 2009Posts32,783

Some posts have been removed. They involve speculation about a fatal car crash being somehow connected to this case. Local rumor is not appropriate source material for speculation or theorizing. Unless or until LE or the MSM suggest there is a connection please discontinue discussing it in relation to the murder of Vanessa Marcotte. Thank you
​

 

[ElemWatson]

Just joined WS recently, and this is my debut post here. I was reading about the Vanessa Marcotte case earlier on the Web, and chanced upon the WS site.

The reason for my interest in this case is that a good friend of mine works at Google, and VM worked for my friend. She was his assistant in the advertising part of the company. My buddy is still torn up about it - says VM was the nicest person you could know, didn't have a mean bone in her body. Google bussed a whole bunch of employees to her funeral in MA.

This doesn't seem like a random attack to me. The NY/ Queens case seems more likely to be a random one. Random attacks are more likely in big cities like NY, where there's typically a larger number of whackos floating around, and you're more likely to run into one. Much less likely in a place like Princeton, with no murder history in decades. JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Thyme]

Condolences to your friend ElemWatson. Given the location...I completely agree with your theory that this is no random crime.

 

[rosesfromangels]

Just joined WS recently, and this is my debut post here. I was reading about the Vanessa Marcotte case earlier on the Web, and chanced upon the WS site.

The reason for my interest in this case is that a good friend of mine works at Google, and VM worked for my friend. She was his assistant in the advertising part of the company. My buddy is still torn up about it - says VM was the nicest person you could know, didn't have a mean bone in her body. Google bussed a whole bunch of employees to her funeral in MA.

This doesn't seem like a random attack to me. The NY/ Queens case seems more likely to be a random one. Random attacks are more likely in big cities like NY, where there's typically a larger number of whackos floating around, and you're more likely to run into one. Much less likely in a place like Princeton, with no murder history in decades. JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Agree. Not random; this was a lay in wait murder. I keep thinking about the source of the fire. (Blowtorch?)
I'm sure the remains would give strong clues there.
If it's any consolation, I have no doubt this murder will be solved, and I don't think the suspect radius is that large geographically.

 

[Madeleine74]

7 weeks, not one clue from LE that the public is aware of since the Aug 11th press conference, not how she was killed, not if this killer is/is not the same killer as in the queens murder, nothing.

snipped to save space...


I've followed a lot of cases over the last 2 decades and it's more common than not for investigators to say next to nothing about an active case. In my city they are very tight-lipped. Press conferences do not impart much information either.

This is not by accident; the public and Internet sleuthers don't solve cases, it's homicide investigators and LE and FBI who do so with the various tools and science and interviews they utilize. Yes, sometimes a tip will provide a direction, sometimes even a name. Outside of that, I've never personally witnessed speculation/rumoring helping solve a case--it often causes more pain and sometimes innocent people get accused of heinous crimes.

The investigator's sole focus is solving the case and not compromising the investigation so that when/if they do solve a case, the case can move forward and be litigated by the DA inside a courtroom. Assuaging the curious and lookyloos is not part of the equation.

LE always (100%) of the time know more than the general public and they never disclose most of what they know. A few pieces may come out, but that's generally it. If they have a video where they need an I.D. they'll ask for the public's help or a specific piece of info they need help with (like anyone who spotted a vehicle at the time).

Until a case is solved and taken to court it's often <crickets>.

 

[1306kayaker]

Thanks, I've now added that to the map, quoting your post in the little map marker text box. I confess to being a little confused about it means and would be grateful for any further context you can offer. That was Sunday night of Aug 7, the day of the murder, right?. You mention, Kayaker, that "LE didn't find evidence in this vicinity until Thursday". Are you suggesting that the did, indeed, find something of interest there on Thursday? Here's the link to the map.

Forager - I'm not sure if it means anything at all! I hesitate to elaborate too much since I don't have a link to MSM confirming where the additional evidence was found. I joined Websleuths to follow this case and began taking notes on relevant events in the investigation. I didn't realize it was common for MSM accounts to be scrubbed or else I would have done screenshots of some of these articles.

That said, according to my notes (along w a Link that no longer contains the reference) LE found evidence 1/2 mile south of the body on Thursday. 1/2 mile south is in the vicinity of Sam Cobb Lane / Cobb Brook.

According to the Landmark police logs someone on Sam Cobb Lane called in a disturbance in the woods at 10:xx on the Sunday night that VM was killed . My assumption is that it was the police searching the area but, as I run varying scenarios around in my head, I considered that the killer could be back in the area because he dropped something and was trying to find it. Super far fetched and the police logs are full of suspicious incidents after VMs death but I wanted to throw it out there.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[1306kayaker]

snipped to save space...


I've followed a lot of cases over the last 2 decades and it's more common than not for investigators to say next to nothing about an active case. In my city they are very tight-lipped. Press conferences do not impart much information either.

This is not by accident; the public and Internet sleuthers don't solve cases, it's homicide investigators and LE and FBI who do so with the various tools and science and interviews they utilize. Yes, sometimes a tip will provide a direction, sometimes even a name. Outside of that, I've never personally witnessed speculation/rumoring helping solve a case--it often causes more pain and sometimes innocent people get accused of heinous crimes.

The investigator's sole focus is solving the case and not compromising the investigation so that when/if they do solve a case, the case can move forward and be litigated by the DA inside a courtroom. Assuaging the curious and lookyloos is not part of the equation.

LE always (100%) of the time know more than the general public and they never disclose most of what they know. A few pieces may come out, but that's generally it. If they have a video where they need an I.D. they'll ask for the public's help or a specific piece of info they need help with (like anyone who spotted a vehicle at the time).

Until a case is solved and taken to court it's often <crickets>.

Thanks for your insight. Something that I've struggled with on this case is working LEs focus on a vehicle into possible scenarios. To me, and a lot of others on this forum, it just makes more sense that the killer would have remained unseen easier if on foot or on a bike. Based on your familiarity with how LE works, do their specific requests for info on a vehicle seem based on hard evidence that they obviously can't reveal or more of a dragnet to capture any and all possible leads?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[Rocky1]

Just joined WS recently, and this is my debut post here. I was reading about the Vanessa Marcotte case earlier on the Web, and chanced upon the WS site.

The reason for my interest in this case is that a good friend of mine works at Google, and VM worked for my friend. She was his assistant in the advertising part of the company. My buddy is still torn up about it - says VM was the nicest person you could know, didn't have a mean bone in her body. Google bussed a whole bunch of employees to her funeral in MA.

This doesn't seem like a random attack to me. The NY/ Queens case seems more likely to be a random one. Random attacks are more likely in big cities like NY, where there's typically a larger number of whackos floating around, and you're more likely to run into one. Much less likely in a place like Princeton, with no murder history in decades. JMO


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Thank you for your post.
Welcome to the forum. I am new here as well. I agree with everything you have posted, and I think your last paragraph is one reason this case is so shocking.

 

[Madeleine74]

Thanks for your insight. Something that I've struggled with on this case is working LEs focus on a vehicle into possible scenarios. To me, and a lot of others on this forum, it just makes more sense that the killer would have remained unseen easier if on foot or on a bike. Based on your familiarity with how LE works, do their specific requests for info on a vehicle seem based on hard evidence that they obviously can't reveal or more of a dragnet to capture any and all possible leads?

This. If they're asking for information pertaining to a vehicle it's because they received information a vehicle was spotted at or near the scene around the time of the murder.

 

[Rocky1]

Agree. Not random; this was a lay in wait murder. I keep thinking about the source of the fire. (Blowtorch?)
I'm sure the remains would give strong clues there.
If it's any consolation, I have no doubt this murder will be solved, and I don't think the suspect radius is that large geographically.

There may have very well been a blowtorch used, Many homeowners have small torches in their homes.
The only thing that steered me away from that, was the soot, and ash on the logs from the crime scene video. I would think that if the fire was that controlled, there wouldn't be any, or not as much anyway. JMO.