Found Deceased MI - Venus Stewart, 32, Colon, 28 April 2010 - # 6 *D. Stewart guilty*

[Natal]

Let's not forget, he had already made threats that he should kill her with a gun.

Actually, that was in a transcript that a paralegal made from a recording provided by VS. The paralegal obviously would not have been able to verify that the person on the recording was DS, it could have been anyone. So, unless they locate the recording and verify that it actually is him, it is just hearsay.

 

[thesaint]

It cannot be unrelated. It has to be within the scope of the search warrant.

Th police seem to have license to interpret the parameters of a search warrant fairly broadly, e.g., taking those parking passes for Busch Gardens from Doug's VA apt.

And considering that DS's parents, apparently, live on a farm? There's all manner of useful-in-an-abduction implements and tools lying around a farmhouse that it's easy enough for the police to take a few of them as potential evidence within the parameters of the warrant.

Not saying the police didn't find anything; but it's also possible they didn't find anything really related (or, more importantly perhaps, really implicating of DS) and simply grabbed a few items they "believed" at the time "to be related" to keep from leaving empty-handed.

 

[Natal]

I'm a little shocked that despite death threats, the timing of the temp custody of the girls, and evidence pointing to DS, so many are so reluctant to even consider he did this.

I've said all along he killed her, or he paid someone to kill her.
If I am right, either way, he's guilty of murder. If he paid someone to do it, he is responsible for her death.

Why he is defended more than the victim is I don't know. I'm a little shocked by it.

IMO/JMO/MOO and all that jazz.

We are not reluctant to consider that he did it, in fact history suggests that he likely did do it, that is how most of these cases work out. That said, the actual evidence proving that is (as far as we know) sparse to non-existant. We can't even be sure that she actually has been abducted, we just know she is missing. Whatever he did or didnt do prior to VS's dissappearance, whatever she did, is not evidence for what happened that monday, neither is what someone else did in another case. That sort of stuff is inflammatory which leads people to make conclusions on emotion, not solid facts.

If they really want to make a breakthrough in this case, then finding VS, dead or alive, is the top priority. Once that happens, or if it happens, things will likely moe pretty quickly.

There may well be solid facts we don't know about, but known to LE, in this case, but until we know those facts the jury is still out.

 

[pufnstuf]

The relevant bit was "“We did find some evidence that we believe related to the disappearance of Venus.”

They didn't say "is related" or "is directly connected". They have not made a link, that is what you are doing. They didn't say what the evidence was either, it could be anything, something damning or something unrelated. We don't know.

That's the purpose of websleuths. To take disparate pieces of information that we glean from the sources and to attempt to figure out what happened.

And, BBM, yeah, that's true. None of us do. You don't. I don't. I've said that a million times. So it's really kind of silly and futile to argue over semantics.

 

[Natal]

So how did evidence related to Venus's abduction (and possible murder) end up in the home of the elder Stewart? Risko stated that they ran cadaver dogs over the property and that evidence was taken from inside the home.

How'd it get there? Either Doug did it or someone in his family did?

The alibi hasn't even been mentioned by Risko recently.

The Cadaver dogs didn't find anything.

The evidence found was "believed" to be related, it was not "definitely" related. If it was definitely related they would have said so, the term "believed" means they don't know.

 

[pufnstuf]

Th police seem to have license to interpret the parameters of a search warrant fairly broadly, e.g., taking those parking passes for Busch Gardens from Doug's VA apt.

And considering that DS's parents, apparently, live on a farm? There's all manner of useful-in-an-abduction implements and tools lying around a farmhouse that it's easy enough for the police to take a few of them as potential evidence within the parameters of the warrant.

Not saying the police didn't find anything; but it's also possible they didn't find anything really related (or, more importantly perhaps, really implicating of DS) and simply grabbed a few items they "believed" at the time "to be related" to keep from leaving empty-handed.

Sure. It's possible.

But it still has to be within the scope of the investigation. This is the investigative phase, not the trial phase, so it's funny to watch people try this case as if it's already in court when no one has even been arrested yet.

 

[Natal]

I take complete offense to this!! I happen to KNOW plenty of Marines - 'jarheads' that are very intelligent, articulate, and wouldn't need someone else to plan out something like this for them!! Just because DS was a Marine - that doesn't mean he was dumb. But, on the other hand, he could have been a complete idiot BEFORE he became a marine too!

Please don't categorize our Military personnel as not being intelligent, they go through intense training and learn things that most people will never learn!

...and keep in mind that someone as simple as a 'truck painter' can be very devious killers - ask Gary Ridgeway.

If he had been to college, even if he didn't complete it, he obviously isnt dumb.

 

[Natal]

I know there was a tape, but where is the the tape now?

I must have missed something.
If they have it, I'm sure they listened to it.

IIRC the detective was quoting from the transcription, which is not good enough.

 

[pufnstuf]

The Cadaver dogs didn't find anything.

The evidence found was "believed" to be related, it was not "definitely" related. If it was definitely related they would have said so, the term "believed" means they don't know.

Again, semantics. It's a strawman argument.

 

[pufnstuf]

IIRC the detective was quoting from the transcription, which is not good enough.

What would meet your threshold for "good enough?"

 

[Natal]

It cannot be unrelated. It has to be within the scope of the search warrant.

No it doesn't. They just need to "think" it is related, then they can take anything. The could have taken the dog's water bowl for all we know and claimed they "believed it was related".

 

[Natal]

What would meet your threshold for "good enough?"

The actual recording itself, together with a voice analysis to prove who was speaking on the recording.

 

[pufnstuf]

The actual recording itself, together with a voice analysis to prove who was speaking on the recording.

You don't think that will be done before trial?

Again, this case is nowhere near the trial phase.

 

[pufnstuf]

No it doesn't. They just need to "think" it is related, then they can take anything. The could have taken the dog's water bowl for all we know and claimed they "believed it was related".

They have to delimit the scope on the affidavit to the judge. What they take has to be case-related. They can't just take grandma's hair rollers unless they believe those rollers to contain evidence.

And investigators don't want to take stuff that isn't case-connected anyway. The more they collect, the more time it takes to process. It would be counterproductive to do otherwise.

 

[LLLindsayy]

"ST. JOSEPH, Mich. (CBS/WMMT) Police say they have found new evidence in the disappearance of Venus Stewart after searching the home of the parents of Venus' estranged husband."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504083_162-20006115-504083.html

I know this information has been posted seeing as I got the link from here a couple pages back, but I think I will bring it forward since people are still discussing.

This bit right here says that the evidence they found in/at the house of Doug's parents IS related to VS' disappearance. If you're looking to pick apart the wording, true, it does not say that that the evidence found at Doug's parents' house related to Venus' disappearance links Doug to her disappearance.

The only real information they give us is that they are not using the term "believed to be related." Is that new information that you folks are willing to accept? Is there a problem with this wording?

The only other way I can construe this to say something it probably doesn't mean is that they searched the home and then later on in the day (somewhere else they're not mentioning) they found new evidence. If that's how you interpret this, let's start that discussion.

 

[LLLindsayy]

They were arrested on other charges though.

You still require evidence that a crime was committed and that the persome accused was at the scene though. The "maybe a crime was committed" won't do it. Take Drew Peterson and that fellow in Utah(?) for example.

Wait, Natal, that wasn't what you said.

You said they can't get an arrest warrant until they find VS. You didn't say they can't get an arrest warrant until they can prove a crime was committed.


Your original post

They can't get an arrest warrant until they find VS. They have no evidence that a crime has been committed otherwise.

My response

False!

Casey Anothony was arrested before they found Caylee.
John Gardner was arrested before they found Chelsea.
Mario Andrette McNeill was arrested before they found Shaniya.

There are other cases as well.

They may not charge him with murder this early, but he can certainly be arrested!

I wouldn't wanna get things mixed up because of wording, ya know?

 

[Calliope]

All we know about his alibi is that Risko said that it "appears to check out, for now."

Then, later on, Risko said that they were going to go back and look at his alibi again..."leave no stone unturned."

And since that, not a word about the alibi. I don't blame that on Risko... I blame it on the several reporters who interviewed him over the past few days whose mind it never crossed to ask one of the most important questions that should have been asked:

"How is Doug's alibi holding up?"

True.

 

[crystalgenie]

We are not reluctant to consider that he did it, in fact history suggests that he likely did do it, that is how most of these cases work out. That said, the actual evidence proving that is (as far as we know) sparse to non-existant. We can't even be sure that she actually has been abducted, we just know she is missing. Whatever he did or didnt do prior to VS's dissappearance, whatever she did, is not evidence for what happened that monday, neither is what someone else did in another case. That sort of stuff is inflammatory which leads people to make conclusions on emotion, not solid facts.

If they really want to make a breakthrough in this case, then finding VS, dead or alive, is the top priority. Once that happens, or if it happens, things will likely moe pretty quickly.

There may well be solid facts we don't know about, but known to LE, in this case, but until we know those facts the jury is still out.

I couldn't have said it better. We are here to discuss the POIs, victim, case and what little evidence there is. That's what makes this forum interesting. We can read what eachother has to say and then post our opinion. We discuss it with eachother because criminal cases, forensics, law, murders, and missing people are the things that interests us. My family gets either bored or disturbed when I talk about all the cases on Websleuths. It is just not their "thing" it's mine.

 

[PickieChickie]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DJSu1B9ApYk&feature=player_embedded
​

 

[maggieo]

Then LE needs to, as my mom used to say, **** or get off the pot. Arrest him.

What's the rush? He's not a serial killer; he's not going to kill anyone else. (Eventually maybe the next wife, but that's a ways off.) There's a big danger in arresting the guy too soon, but very little in waiting. (Only the torment to the family, and that some evidence will disappear/degrade.)

LE wants to make sure their case is air-tight. Most likely they want to find VS, which would be ideal. I suspect they'd go ahead without a body, but the evidence base would have to be SO much stronger in that situation.